EXCHANGE 


Pleistocene    Deposits 
of 

South  Carolina 


C 


GRIFFITH  THOMPSON  PUGH 
1905 


C 


Presses  of 

THE  STATE  COMPANY 
Columbia,  S.  C. 


Pleistocene  Deposits 

of 
South  Carolina 


With  an  Especial  Attempt  at  Ascertaining  what  must  have  been  the  Environ- 
mental Conditions  under  which  the  Pleistocene  Mollusca 
of  the  State  lived. 


BY 

GRIFFITH  THOMPSON  PUGH 


A  tHESIS 

Submitted  to  the  Faculty  of  Vanderbilt  University  for  the  Degree  of  Doctor 

of  Philosophy. 


NASHVILLE,  TENN. 
1905 


EARTH 

SCIENCE$f 

UBRARY 


CONTENTS. 


INTRODUCTION. 

Page 

Interest  Attaching  to  Pleistocene 5 

Field  Work   .     .      .     .  ;..     .     .     .: 6 

Scope  of  Paper  .      .,..*. •  8 

Acknowledgments 10 

CHAPTER  I. 
HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

General  Statements  Concerning  Early  Workers 10 

Work  of  Vanuxem,  Catesby,  and  Bartram n 

Work  of  Conrad  and  Lyell 1 1 

Ruffin,  Various  Divisions  of  the  Coastal  Plain 12 

Tuomey,    Divisions    into   Cretaceous,    Eocene,    Pliocene   and 

Post-Pliocene 13 

F.  S.  Holmes,  Work  on  the  Pleistocene 17 

The  Phosphate  Problem  and  Shepherd,  Holmes  and  Shaler     .  19 

Recent  Workers  and  their  Work 19 

CHAPTER  II. 

GEOGRAPHICAL    DISTRIBUTION     OF    THE    PLEISTOCENE 
OF  THE  COASTAL  PLAIN. 

General  Remarks      .    '.     v    •  '.     *  .'•  -. :  ..      .  :•...:     . • . ' .* '    .     „  20 

Maine '     .    ....     .  .*-.     ,      ,      ....  22 

New  Hampshire  and  Massachusetts     .     >     .     ....      .     .  22 

Rhode  Island  and  Connecticut  .      .      ...     ...     .     .     .  23 

New  York     .      .....      ...     .     .     .     .      .      .  23 

New  Jersey   .      .      »     .     .....     .     .     .     .,    ....  24 

Pennsylvania  and  Delaware.           .     »   "+ 25 

Maryland 25 

Virginia 27 

North  and  South  Carolina 28 

Georgia  and  Florida 29 

239363 


CHAPTER  III. 

GEOGRAPHIC  AND  STRATIGRAPHIC  RELATIONS  OF  THE 
PLEISTOCENE  OF  SOUTH  CAROLINA. 

Page 

The  Potomac .  29 

The  Marine  Cretaceous 30 

The  Eocene  and  Miocene 31 

The  Pliocene      ..    .* ..-.,.....     ....     ,     ,     .     .     .  32 

Fossiliferous  Pleistocene  with  Descriptions  of  Localities     .      .  33 

Argument  Concerning  Beds  Underlying  Pleistocene     ...  37 

Non-fossiliferous  Pleistocene   .      .      .     ...    ...    .,:    .      .,     .  38 

CHAPTER  IV. 

TABLES    OF    SOUTH    CAROLINA    PLEISTOCENE    FOSSILS, 

WITH  DATA  FOR  AN  ATTEMPT  AT  INTERPRETING 

ENVIRONMENTAL  CONDITIONS  UNDER  WHICH 

SUCH  FOSSILS  LIVE. 

1.  Explanation  of  the  Tables  .      .      .      .»'*.;     .,    ,     .       40 

2.  Tables       :'»,;>      ...      ..;,.,.,}    •      .    ...>:     .      .    •;-.        44 

3.  Lists  of  Pleistocene  Fossils  from  Other  States : 

a.  Florida    .      .     ..  •  „  ••..,*,:•:•..;  •  '•-.•*  •    .-;  ,  . ;    ,.-: .,'..'  .  .'  .  52 

b.  Cornfield  Harbor,  Maryland   .     -.  .,  » .- --.V-    V  .  .  .  54 

c.  Sankoty  Head,  Massachusetts    .,;.   Vy. v  ;.  .*  .  *  54 

4.  Discussions  of  and  Conclusions  from  the  Tables : 

General  Remarks    .    .;:    *     .     *.    .     .    %^ .     .  .  .     «  55 

Concerning  Depth  .      .      .      .      .      .      .      .".-.,.   .  .      .  57 

Concerning  Shore  and  Bottom  Conditions 59 

Concerning  Geographical  Range 61 

General  Conclusions  from  the  Study  of  the  Tables  ...  65 
Bibliography. 


INTRODUCTION 


The  Pleistocene  Period  is  of  especial  interest,  as  it  corresponds  to 
one  of  those  periods  commonly  looked  upon  as  marking  a  break  in 
the  geological  record  left  man  by  fossils  in  the  sedimentary  rocks  of 
the  earth.  There  is  evidence  to  believe  that  there  was  a  long  period 
of  time  between  the  last  of  the  determined  Paleozoic  formations  and 
the  first  of  the  Mesozoic,  and  another  long  period  between  the  last 
of  the  Mesozoic  and  the  first  of  the  Cenozoic.  Of  these  periods  only 
a  partial  record,  in  way  of  a  few  widely  scattered  deposits,  has  been 
left.  They  are  generally  looked  upon  by  geologists  as  periods  of 
great  and  rapid  changes  in  life-forms.  LeConte  and  others  put 
themselves  on  record  as  believing  these  periods  of  lost  record,  or  at 
least  the  first  of  them,  to  have  been  periods  of  considerable  glacia- 
tion,  when,  whatever  deposits  there  were,  were  put  down  as  drift 
or  some  other  product  of  glaciation  in  such  condition  as  to  be  com- 
pletely obliterated  in  the  long  periods  which  have  since  elapsed. 
The  Pleistocene,  being  evidently  a  period  which  was  ushered  in  by 
the  advance  of  the  ice  from  the  north  upon  more  southernly  latitudes, 
may  throw  some  light  upon  these  other  periods  of  supposed  glaci- 
ation. And  as  the  Pleistocene  can  be  studied  to  some  extent  from  its 
fossiliferous  deposits,  one  sees  that  the  information  gained  from  a 
study  of  the  Pleistocene  may  be  of  some  value  in  interpreting  the 
probable  conditions  that  existed  during  the  periods  of  lost  record 
between  the  Permian  and  the  Triassic,  and  between  the  Cretaceous 
and  the  Eocene.  So  the  Pleistocene  has  this  interest  in  addition  to 
those  inherent  in  itself.  In  this  paper,  however,  there  will  be  no 
further  mention  of  this  particular  phase  of  interest,  but  a  study  of 
such  phases  as  concern  the  Pleistocene  more  directly. 

Though  deficient  in  those  qualities  which  come  by  reason  of  respect 
and  veneration  for  age,  the  Pleistocene  is  of  very  great  interest  as 
furnishing  the  link  that  connects  the  present  life  with  the  life  of  the 
recent  geologic  past.  It  exhibits  the  process  by  which  ocean  bed 
has  been  converted  into  dry  land.  It  gives  evidence  of  the  descent 
of  living  forms  from  fossil  forms,  since  its  fossil  forms  have  very 
many  of  their  characters,  even  to  the  marking  and  colors  of  their 
shells,  almost  as  well  preserved  as  those  of  their  descendants  living 


along  the  coast  today.  It  is  the  period  when,  in  the  course  of  evolu- 
tion, were  ushered  in  those  animals  which  were  to  be  the  contempo- 
raries of  man,  95  per  cent,  of  Pleistocene  forms,  according  to  Lyell, 
being  also  recent. 

With  these  thoughts  in  mind,  the  task  of  working  on  the  Pleisto- 
cene formation  in  South  Carolina  has  been  entered  upon  gladly, 
though  with  many  misgivings  as  to  the  writer's  ability  to  deal  with 
the  problem  as  its  importance  demands.  Of  all  the  Coastal  Plain 
region  from  Texas  to  New  England,  that  portion  in  South  Carolina 
has  been,  perhaps,  least  investigated.  The  true  succession  and 
extent  of  beds  have,  in  many  cases,  not  been  fully  determined.  The 
extreme  thinness  of  the  Miocene,  Pliocene  and  Pleistocene  beds, 
and  consequently  the  greater  likelihood  of  their  being  entirely  re- 
moved in  places  during  periods  of  erosion,  together  with  the  almost 
universally  low  altitude  of  the  surface  with  reference  to  the  sea  and 
the  consequent  absence  of  good  sections  or  even  many  natural 
exposures  of  any  kind  more  than  a  few  feet  deep,  has  made  it  very 
difficult  to  trace  the  succession  and  extent  of  these  formations.  For 
instance,  the  patches  of  Miocene  in  South  Carolina  that  have  been 
left  from  erosion  indicate  that  this  formation  could  not  have  been 
more  than  150  or  200  feet  at  best,  whereas  in  Texas  to  the  south- 
west it  is  more  than  2,500  feet  thick,  and  to  the  north  of  the  State 
it  also  gradually  becomes  thicker.  In  the  region  of  North  and  South 
Carolina  there  seems  to  have  been  a  region  or  belt  of  elevation  or  of 
minimum  subsidence,  perhaps  since  Triassic  time.  This  relative  ele- 
vation has  caused  a  thinning  of  the  successive  beds  since  that  time 
in  this  region.  The  tracing  of  the  extent  and  succession  of  these 
formations  has  been  engaged  in  by  a  good  many  investigators,  from 
the  time  Lyell  visited  the  State,  in  1841-42,  and  before  on  up  to  the 
present,  or  to  within  the  last  two  or  three  years,  when  Dr.  L.  C.  Glenn 
of  Vanderbilt  University  made  some  investigations  concerning  these 
formations  in  preparing  a  paper  on  "Artesian  Well  Prospects  in 
South  Carolina."  The  work  done  by  these  men  will  be  briefly 
reviewed  in  this  paper  under  the  heading,  "A  Historic  Review  of  the 
Work  Done  in  the  Region." 

In  preparation  for  writing  this  paper,  the  writer  found  it  neces- 
sary to  do  some  work  in  the  field,  collecting  fossils  and  making 
observations  of  the  localities  where  the  fossils  were  found.  During 
the  summer  of  1904,  some  time  was  spent  along  the  coast  of  South 
Carolina  in  collecting  Pliocene  and  Pleistocene  fossils  from  well- 
known  localities,  and  noting  the  country  around  such  localities  as 


well  as  the  succession  of  strata  in  the  intermediate  section  where 
the  marl  bed  is  exposed.  Some  recent  shells  were  also  collected 
along  the  beach.  No  new  exposures  were  sought  out,  for  time  was 
limited,  and,  too,  such  was  not  necessary  for  the  investigation  to  be 
carried  on.  In  most  localities  the  observations  of  others  were  con- 
firmed as  to  thickness  and  position  of  fossiliferous  beds  and  other 
beds  above  and  below.  But  at  Young  Island,  the  famous  Simmons 
Bluff  of  geologic  literature,  the  bluff  was  found  somewhat 
changed  from  what  it  was  when  Tuomey,  Holmes,  Burns  and  others 
made  collections  there.  The  "storm  of  1893"  wrought  some  changes 
here  as  elsewhere  along  the  coast,  removing  an  area  of  about  ten 
acres  just  along  the  bluff,  as  Mr.  Geraty,  the  postmaster  and  one  of 
the  largest  truck  farmers  there,  a  man  of  good  memory,  informed 
me.  This,  however,  was  far  from  being  a  disadvantage,  as  it  gave 
a  greater  area  of  exposure  and  consequently  greater  facility  for  col- 
lecting. As  this  was  the  writer's  first  experience  in  collecting  fossils, 
with  the  exception  of  collecting  under  different  conditions  from  the 
Silurian  beds  about  Nashville,  Tenn.,  one  can  well  imagine  the 
delight  with  which  the  broad  exposure  of  fossil  shells  was  beheld, 
and  with  what  eagerness  shovel  and  sieve  were  brought  into  play. 
The  exposure  extends  outward  from  the  foot  of  the  bluff  a  distance 
of  thirty  or  forty  yards  at  low  tide.  The  length  of  the  exposed  bed 
along  the  margin  of  Wadmalaw  Sound  is  a  half-mile  or  more.  Also 
at  White  Point  Creek  (Price's  Creek)  such  great  changes  had  taken 
place  that  the  Pleistocene  fossil  bed  located  by  Tuomey  as  on  the 
right  bank  of  the  creek,  a  half-mile  from  the  point  where  the  old 
Kingston  country  road  crosses  the  creek  and  plainly  within  view  of 
the  ocean  beach,  could  not  be  found  at  all,  though  four  or  five  hours, 
with  the  help  of  Mr.  Sessions  and  his  two  boys  of  that  neighborhood, 
were  spent  in  the  effort  to  locate  it.  Exposures  were  looked  for 
everywhere  within  proper  limits,  and  numerous  small  holes  three  or 
four  feet  deep  were  made  over  an  area  a  half-mile  long  and  several 
rods  wide,  extending  from  a  quarter  of  a  mile  of  the  old  Kingston 
road  almost  to  the  beach,  but  the  shells  sought  for  were  not  found. 
The  supposition  is  that  the  bed  had  been  so  deeply  covered  with  sand 
by  the  storm  of  1893,  or  some  other,  that  the  holes  made  did  not 
reach  down  to  it,  or  else  that  the  bed  itself  had  been  swept  away  and 
destroyed.  Storm-driven  waves  may  easily  accomplish  this  in  case 
of  a  bed  of  limited  area  as  this,  from  Tuomey's  description,  seems  to 
have  been.  In  the  proper  place  in  this  paper  will  be  given  descrip- 
tions of  the  various  localities  from  which  Pleistocene  shells  have  been 
collected. 


8 

Though  a  limited  discussion  of  the  Pleistocene  of  the  whole  At- 
lantic Coast  from  Maine  to  Florida  will  be  given,  and  a  discussion 
of  the  succession,  relation  and  extent  of  the  Coastal  Plain  formations 
in  South  Carolina  will  be  attempted,  the  main  object  of  this  paper 
is  to  attempt  an  investigation  of  what  must  have  been  the  environ- 
mental conditions  under  which  the  marine  mollusca  lived  during  the 
Pleistocene  Period  in  the  neighborhood  of  South  Carolina.  Tem- 
perature, depth,  shore,  bottom,  current  and  other  conditions  that  then 
existed  will  be  sought  for  by  comparison  with  such  conditions  today, 
upon  the  basis  that  a  species  now  favoring  a  particular  habitat,  if 
then  in  existence,  favored  the  same  kind  of  habitat.  Since  95  per 
cent,  of  Pleistocene  species  are  regarded  as  recent,  as  commonly 
accepted,  one  easily  sees  that  if  exact  knowledge  were  at  hand  con- 
cerning the  habitats  of  living  species  a  fairly  just  interpretation  of 
Pleistocene  conditions  could  be  arrived  at.  In  connection  with  this 
problem  tables  have  been  made  of  all  South  Carolina  Pleistocene 
mollusca  so  far  as  the  writer  could  gather  the  information,  the  work 
of  Holmes  and  Dall  being  drawn  upon  to  make  the  tables  as  full 
as  possible.  So  far  as  the  writer  is  aware  this  is  the  first  attempt 
made  at  just  this  problem  for  the  Pleistocene,  and  he  feels  that  his 
effort  is  very  imperfect,  but  trusts  that  the  labor  may  be  of  some 
service,  however  slight. 

The  material  collected  during  the  summer  was  sorted  and  classified 
during  the  fall  and  winter  at  Vanderbilt  University.  Dr.  Ball's 
work  in  the  Proceedings  of  the  Wagner  Free  Institute  of  Sciences 
was  followed  in  naming  the  different  species  found.  There  are 
some  species,  however,  which  are  not  given  by  Dall ;  these  have  been 
named  as  Holmes  named  them  in  his  "Post  Pliocene  Fossils  of  South 
Carolina."  Just  here  it  must  be  stated  that  during  the  year  1903-04 
a  class  in  Paleontology  at  Vanderbilt  University,  of  which  the  writer 
was  a  member,  worked  up  a  lot  of  shells  from  the  Stono  River  beds. 
This  Stono  River  material  has  been  used  in  making  out  the  tables. 
In  addition,  material  from  Cornfield  Harbor,  St.  Mary's  County, 
Maryland,  has  been  ready  at  hand  and  used  for  purposes  of  com- 
parison. A  list  of  the  Cornfield  Harbor  fossils,  increased  by  a  few 
additional  forms  from  Conrad's  list  from  that  same  locality,  will  be 
given.  So  also  will  be  given  lists  of  Pleistocene  fossils  from  the 
Florida  beds,  and  from  the  beds  of  Sankoty  Head,  Massachusetts, 
and  attention  called  to  the  similarities  or  differences  of  these  fauna 
from  the  different  localities. 

Inasmuch  as  no  one  formation  can  be  treated  independently  of 


those  just  above  it  or  just  below,  the  Pliocene  of  South  Carolina  has 
also  been  studied  to  a  limited  extent  in  its  relation  to  the  Pleistocene. 
Though  material  was  collected  from  the  Waccamaw  beds,  time  has 
failed  in  which  to  work  it  up,  and  the  work  done  by  Johnson  on 
these  deposits  has  been  largely  relied  upon  in  this  part  of  the  paper. 
Tuomey  and  Holmes,  in  their  "Pliocene  Fossils  of  South  Carolina," 
have  classed  as  Pliocene  not  only  the  well-determined  Pliocene  of  the 
Waccamaw,  but  also  the  Miocene  about  Darlington,  Sumter  and 
elsewhere.  Their  otherwise  excellent  volume  is,  by  reason  of  this 
confusion,  well  nigh  useless  for  the  purpose  here  intended.  Only 
those  species  distinctly  mentioned  as  coming  from  the  Waccamaw 
beds  can  be  depended  upon  in  arriving  at  any  safe  conclusion.  The 
tables  already  mentioned  will  also  show  the  relation  which  the 
Pleistocene  fossils  bear  to  the  Pliocene  and  to  the  Miocene,  though 
no  attempt  will  be  made  to  prepare  separate  lists  of  the  Pliocene  and 
Miocene  fossils  of  the  State. 

In  order  to  bring  the  scope  of  the  paper  more  clearly  before  the 
mind,  it  is  well  to  recapitulate,  having  regard  to  the  sequence  that 
has  been  followed  in  the  discussion  of  the  various  phases  of  the 
subject.  Following  this  introduction,  the  paper  begins  with  a  dis- 
cussion of  the  work  of  the  early  investigators  in  the  region  and  a 
historical  review  of  the  work  done  from  that  time  to  the  present. 
This  is  followed  by  a  chapter  on  the  geographic  distribution  of  the 
Pleistocene  or  Columbia  formation  along  the  Atlantic  Coast  from 
Maine  to  Florida.  Then  comes  a  more  particular  discussion  of  the 
Pleistocene  of  South  Carolina,  together  with  descriptions  of  Pleisto- 
cene fossil  localities  with  sections,  wherever  possible,  showing  strati- 
graphic  relations.  After  this  come  the  tables,  giving  the  Pleistocene 
species  found  in  South  Carolina  with  localities;  other  ages  in  addi- 
tion to  the  Pleistocene  in  which  they  have  been  found,  and  the  rela- 
tive scarcity  or  abundance  as  Pleistocene  fossils ;  the  depth  range  and 
shore  and  bottom  conditions  of  the  living  representatives  of  the  Pleis- 
tocene fossils,  also  their  extreme  northern  and  southern  geograph- 
ical ranges.  Just  after  this  a  discussion  of  the  tables  and  conclusions 
from  the  information  there  gained  are  given.  The  bibliography 
at  the  end  is  not  intended  to  be  exhaustive,  but  embraces  only  the 
more  important  articles  that  have  been  published  on  the  subject. 
Especially  is  this  true  in  regard  to  the  publications  concerning  the 
Pleistocene  of  the  whole  Atlantic  Coast;  only  a  very  few  of  these 
are  given. 


10 

In  making  acknowledgments  for  kindnesses  shown  me  while  en- 
gaged in  this  piece  of  work,  I  wish  first  of  all  to  speak  of  the  help, 
in  way  of  encouragement  and  suggestions,  that  my  instructor,  Dr. 
L.  C.  Glenn,  has  at  all  times  most  cheerfully  given  me.  He  has 
given  me  the  use  of  his  own  geological  library,  and  where  a  book 
needed  could  be  obtained  neither  from  his  library  nor  from  that  of 
the  University,  he  borrowed  it  for  me  from  elsewhere.  His  own 
collections  of  fossils  and  those  of  the  University  have  been  at  my 
disposal  in  making  out  lists  and  in  preparing  tables.  In  the  discus- 
sion of  the  Geographic  and  Stratigraphic  relations  of  the  Pleistocene 
of  the  State,  his  observations  and  investigations  have  been  of  great 
value. 

My  thanks  are  due  the  University  for  financial  assistance  while 
collecting  fossils,  and  are  most  heartily  given.  I  wish  also  to  ac- 
knowledge the  kindness  of  Dr.  W.  H.  Dall,  of  Washington,  in 
promptly  identifying  certain  species  sent  him. 

I.   HISTORICAL  REVIEW. 

The  Atlantic  Coastal  Plain  of  the  United  States  has  been  an  object 
of  interest  and  study  to  geologists  since  the  time  the  pioneers  of 
American  geology,  Mitchell  and  McClure,  first  discriminated  the 
region  and  aroused  in  others  the  desire  to  investigate  its  problems. 
It  was  due  to  investigations  in  this  region  and  to  efforts  at  inter- 
preting the  records  of  the  ancient  life  in  its  strata  that  Conrad, 
Tuomey,  She  Rogers  brothers,  Holmes  and  many  others,  in  the 
middle  of  the  century  just  passed,  gained  their  renown.  Later  Hil- 
gard  in  the  Gulf  region,  Cook  in  New  Jersey,  and  others  in  the 
region  between  and  in  New  York  and  New  England  studied  the 
succession  of  strata  as  revealed  by  the  fossil  forms  embedded  in 
them,  and  so  impressed  their  ideas  of  classification  and  nomenclature 
that  these  are  still  largely  adhered  to.  In  recent  years  McGee,  Salis- 
bury, Chamberlain,  Dall,  Shattuck  and  others  have  wrought  in  this 
field  so  perseveringly  and  so  thoroughly  that  it  may  be  said  that  no 
section  of  our  country  has  been  more  thoroughly  investigated  than 
has  the  Costal  Plain. 

North  Carolina  has  the  honor  of  being  the  first  State  of  the  Union 
to  authorize,  at  its  own  expense,  a  survey  of  its  territory  "with  the 
desire  of  developing  its  resources  and  enlarging  the  boundaries  of 
human  knowledge."  South  Carolina  was  the  next  to  fall  in  line  in 
this  commendable  work.  Whatever  may  have  been  its  shortcomings 
since,  the  State  made  a  good  start.  By  order  of  its  legislature,  Mr. 


II 

Lardner  Vanuxem,  in  1826,  made  a  report  on  a  geological  and  min- 
.eralogical  survey  of  the  State.  A  collection  of  minerals  from 
different  parts  of  the  State  was  placed  in  the  Museum  of  South 
Carolina  College.  Vanuxem  wrote  a  paper  on  the  Tertiary  and  Creta- 
ceous formations  of  South  Carolina,  and  this  appeared  in  the  Journal 
of  the  Academy  of  Natural  Sciences,  Philadelphia.  He  was  the  first 
to  note  the  occurrence  of  the  Pleistocene  at  Charleston,  collecting 
some  of  the  fossils  of  this  age  from  a  well  there  and  taking  them 
to  Philadelphia.  But  before  1826,  even  as  far  back  as  1731,  Catesby 
wrote  something  of  geological  interest,  calling  attention  to  the  en- 
croachment of  the  sea  upon  the  land.  This  was  a  matter  of  concern 
at  that  time  and  attracted  the  attention  of  many,  especially  those  of 
a  scientific  turn  of  mind.  Closely  akin  with  this  question  was  an- 
other, the  subsidence  of  the  coast.  Bartram,  in  his  "Travels,"  was 
the  first  to  point  out  evidences  of  subsidence — the  submerged  stumps 
of  trees,  common  along  the  coast.  Lyell  and  others  noticed  these 
submerged  stumps  and  came  to  the  same  conclusion,  that  these 
stumps  show  a  vertical  submergence  of  the  land.  This  mention  of 
the  work  of  Catesby  and  Bartram  has  been  made  simply  to  show 
that,  very  early  in  the  history  of  the  State,  men  were  making  contri- 
butions, though  slight,  to  its  geology. 

In  1832  Conrad  determined  the  existence  of  the  Miocene  in  the 
State.  This  determination  rested  upon  some  fossils  collected  at  a 
point  just  below  the  junction  of  the  Wateree  and  Congaree  rivers. 
He  also  attributed  certain  deposits  on  Cooper  River  to  the  Tertiary. 

Lyell,  the  leading  geologist  of  his  time,  in  1841-42  gave  a  few 
days'  investigation  to  the  strata  of  the  Cretaceous  and  Tertiary 
formations  of  the  State.  He  went  down  the  Savannah  River  from 
Augusta,  examining  the  exposed  beds  as  he  went.  He  also  investi- 
gated the  region  from  the  mouth  of  Cooper  River  northwest  to 
the  Santee,  where  that  stream  is  joined  by  the  old  canal,  a  distance 
of  forty  miles,  and  then  on  up  the  Santee  to  Half- Way  Swamp. 
Along  the  Cooper  and  on  the  Santee,  he  traced  the  white  limestone 
of  the  Eocene  formation,  and  at  Stout's  Creek  he  found  this  to  dis- 
appear under  a  newer  formation,  the  Buhrstone.  The  results  of  his 
investigations  are  mentioned  in  a  general  way  in  his  "Travels  in 
North  America,"  and  more  particularly  in  his  "Observations  on  the 
White  Limestone  and  other  Eocene  or  Older  Tertiary  Formations 
of  Virginia,  South  Carolina  and  Georgia."  He  referred  to  the  post- 
Pliocene,  the  marine  shells  of  eastern  South  Carolina,  which  "differ 
in  no  way  from  those  of  the  adjoining  coast,"  and  are  contained  in 


12 

deposits  of  sand  and  clay,  "put  down  when  the  land  stood  lower  than 
today,  while  the  temperature  was  little  different  from  that  of  today." 
After  Vanuxem's  report  of  1826,  nothing  more  was  done  by  the 
State  in  the  way  of  a  survey  until  1842.  In  that  year,  by  authority 
of  the  Legislature,  Mr.  Edmund  Ruffin,  of  Virginia,  was  employed 
to  make  an  agricultural  survey  of  the  State.  He  conducted  the  work 
with  great  ability,  and  his  report  is  valuable  not  only  as  an  agricul- 
tural report,  but  also  as  a  source  of  geological  knowledge,  especially 
the  discussion  of  the  marl  beds.  He  relied  largely  on  characteristic 
fossils  in  determining  the  age  of  the  different  marl  beds  investi- 
gated. These  marl  beds  were  grouped  into  four  classes  :  ( i )  The 
Peedee  bed,  containing  Belemnites  Americana  and  Exogyra  costata, 
and  lying  in  the  region  bordering  on  the  Great  Peedee  and  some  of 
its  tributaries,  as  Black  River,  in  a  continuous  area  in  Marion,  Wil- 
liamsburg  and  Georgetown  counties.  This  formation  was  evidently 
regarded  by  him  as  Cretaceous.  (2)  The  next  oldest  formation  of 
marl,  the  Great  Carolinian  bed,  so  called  by  him  because  of  a  differ- 
ence of  opinion  as  to  its  age,  Vanuxem,  Conrad  and  Morton  consid- 
ering it  Upper  Cretaceou"s  and  Lyell  including  it  in  the  Eocene.  The 
following  observations  were  made  in  regard  to  this  bed  :  That,  though 
the  character  of  the  bed  changes  from  place  to  place,  still  for  the 
most  part  this  marl  is  of  a  dingy  yellowish  white  color,  or  pale  buff 
of  different  shades;  that  the  dip  of  the  surface  is  generally  from 
north  to  south,  and  does  not  differ  greatly  from  the  general  slope 
of  the  country;  that  it  extends  from  just  east  of  the  Santee  to  the 
Savannah  and  beyond,  its  northwestern  limit  being  a  line  almost 
parallel  to  the  line  of  falls  of  the  rivers  and  about  twenty-five  or 
thirty  miles  below,  and  that  eastwardly  it  stretches  to  and  beneath 
the  ocean  and  is  overlaid  in  places  by  younger  beds.  (3)  The  Mio- 
cene marls,  occurring  in  extensive  patches  lying  upon  and  immedi- 
ately in  contact  with  the  older  Pedee  marls  on  the  west  side  of  Peedee 
River  and  extending  into  Darlington  and  Florence  counties,  being 
exposed  along  Swift  and  Black  creeks.  He  also  notes  an  isolated 
patch  of  Miocene  marl  on  Goose  Creek  a  few  miles  above  its  junction 
with  Cooper  River  and  about  twelve  miles  from  Charleston. 
(4)  Post-Pliocene  marl  beds,  which  lie  between  high  and  low  tide 
wherever  yet  (at  that  time)  observed,  probably  with  the  exception 
of  that  under  and  near  Charleston.  This  formation  generally  pre- 
sents but  a  thin  bed,  about  three  feet  thick,  containing  the  shells  of 
such  animals  as  now  live  in  and  mostly  if  not  entirely  belong  to  the 
neighboring  ocean  waters.  Beds  of  post-Pliocene  fossils  were  found 


along  several  tidal  creeks  emptying  into  the  South  Edisto,  at  Distant 
Island,  about  four  miles  south  of  the  town  of  Beaufort,  at  Lady's 
Island,  three  miles  east  of  Beaufort,  and  at  Doctor's  Swamp,  on 
John's  Island,  where  was  found  a  bed  five  miles  in  length.  Under- 
lying Charleston,  he  observes,  at  a  depth  o!  about  fifteen  feet,  is  a 
bed  of  these  shells,  reached  by  the  "fire  wells,"  and  exposed  in 
several  places  around  the  city,  as  at  Haddrell's  Point,  and  at  several 
of  the  bluffs  on  Ashley  and  Cooper  rivers.  Ruffin  also  states  that 
some  of  these  beds  are  several  miles  back  from  the  shore  line,  and 
are  often  overlaid  by  still  later  deposits  of  marsh  soil  several  feet 
thick  and  sometimes  by  fine  san4y  earth.  The  list  of  post-Pliocene 
fossils  prepared  by  Prof.  L.  R.  Gibbes,  of  Charleston  College,  is  of 
fossils  from  the  bed  underneath  and  near  Charleston,  and  is  as  fol- 
lows :  Natica  dupllcata,  Nassa  obsoleta,  Nassa  vibex,  Cerithium 
dislocatum,  Pyrula  carica,  Oliva  Sayana,  Oliva  inutica,  Ovula  acicu- 
laris  Fissurella  alternate,,  Ostrea  Virginica,  Pinna  seminuda,  Area 
incongrua,  Area  pexata,  Area  ponderosa,  Cardium  maculatum, 
Donax  variabilis,  Tellina  alternata,  Lucina  divaricata,  Venus  mer- 
cenaria,  Cytherea  concentrica,  Mactra  lateralis,  Lutraria  canaliculata, 
Balanus  ovularis  (  ?),  Scutellum  quinqueforme  (?). 

After  one  year's  .service  Mr.  Ruffin  resigned,  and  was  succeeded  by 
Mr.  Tourney.  In  1844  it  was  found  advisable  not  to  attempt  an 
agricultural  survey  distinct  from  matters  geological.  Tuomey  was, 
therefore,  asked  to  make  a  report  upon  both  the  agriculture  and  the 
geology  of  the  State.  As  the  work  progressed  it  became  more  and 
more  largely  geological,  and  the  final  report  of  1848  is  titled  "Geo- 
logical Survey  of  South  Carolina."  From  the  requirements  of  the 
case,  the  report  had  to  be  partly  commercial,  but  it  is  of  much  value 
for  its  scientific  weight.  It  is  by  far  the  best  thing  on  South  Caro- 
lina Geology ;  in  fact,  the  only  thing  of  any  extent.  All  sections  of 
the  country  are  treated.  The  coastal  plain  of  the  State  is  here,  for 
the  first  time,  systematically  described  with  an  attempt  at  scien- 
tifically classifying  the  beds.  The  extent  of  the  Cretaceous,  Eocene, 
Pliocene,  and  Pleistocene  formations  is  traced  and  lists  of  fossils 
from  each  given.  Tuomey  was  greatly  assisted  in  this  work  by  col- 
lections of  fossils  made  by  college  professors,  lawyers,  physicians, 
preachers  and  others  of  Charleston  and  the  localities  around.  It 
.seemed  almost  a  fad  among  cultured  people  to  collect  fossils  in  those 
days.  Several  of  the  number  were  intelligent  collectors,  and  their 
observations  were  also  of  value  to  Tuomey  in  preparing  his  treatise. 
Such  men  as  Dr.  R.  W.  Gibbes,  Dr.  Edmund  Ravenal,  Prof.  L.  R. 


14 

Gibbes,  Dr.  Hume,  of  the  Military  Academy,  and  Dr.  Burden,  of 
John's  Island,  were  no  mean  helpers,  and  contributed  largely  to  the 
success  of  the  work.  In  regard  to  the  assistance  given  by  Prof.  F.  S. 
Holmes,  Tuomey's  own  words  are:  "It  would  be  impossible,  if  it 
were  necessary,  for  me  to  separate  my  own  labors  from  those  of 
F.  S.  Holmes,  Esq.,  both  on  the  Ashley  and  in  the  post-Pliocene  of 
the  State.  His  fine  and  valuable  collections  of  fossils  were  placed 
at  my  disposal,  and  I  have  used  them  without  reserve.  It  is  chiefly 
through  his  labors  that  the  Ashley  has  already  become  noted  for  its 
organic  remains."  Tuomey  assigned  the  Coastal  Plain  formations  to 
four  classes  or  ages:  Cretaceous,  Eocene,  Pliocene  and  post-Plio- 
cene. We  are  at  once  struck  by  the  absence  of  the  Miocene  from 
this  enumeration.  He  regarded  the  Miocene,  now  clearly  established 
about  Darlington  and  Sumter,  as  Pliocene,  and  so  put  both  Miocene 
and  Pliocene  as  Pliocene.  In  his  map  to  show  extent  of  formations 
he  uses  the  word  Miocene  for  all  that  extent  of  territory  which  he 
has  carefully  designated  Pliocene  in  the  treatise,  but  this  is  clearly 
a  misprint. 

The  Cretaceous  was  traced,  by  means  of  characteristic  fossils, 
throughout  the  region  described  by  Ruffin  under  the  "Peedee  Marl," 
and  in  addition  was  found  exposed  in  patches  farther  to  the  west  in 
Darlington  and  Florence  counties  along  Lynches  Creek  to  the  mouth 
of  Sparrow  Swamp,  and  farther  to  the  east  it  was  found  on  Little 
Peedee  River  just  where  it  is  joined  by  Lumber  River,  and  on  the 
Waccamaw,  in  Horry  County,  from  three  or  four  miles  below  Con- 
way  to  within  eight  or  ten  miles  of  the  North  Carolina  line.  His 
supposition  was  that  the  Cretaceous  underlay  that  whole  section  of 
country  from  its  most  western  exposure  at  Sparrow  Swamp  on  out 
to  and  beneath  the  ocean.  The  Eocene  was  divided  in  this  survey 
into  three  groups :  ( I )  The  Buhrstone  formation  underlying  the 
calcareous  beds  described  by  Lyell  and  by  Ruffin.  The  Buhrstone 
was  described  as  being  400  feet  thick,  its  upper  portion  containing 
silicified  shells,  being  largely  exposed  up  to  the  line  drawn  from 
Columbia  in  a  direction  a  little  south  of  west  by  Lexington  Court- 
house and  Aiken,  on  to  Augusta,  and  its  southern  exposure  running 
in  an  irregular  line  across  from  Stout's  Creek  on  the  Santee  to  the 
Lower  Three  Runs  on  the  Savannah.  (2)  The  Santee  beds,  the  thick 
beds  of  white  limestone,  marl  and  greensand,  whose  northern  or 
western  exposures  coincide  with  the  line  just  given  for  the  southern 
limit  of  the  Buhrstone.  (3)  The  Ashley  and  Cooper  beds,  the  newest 
Eocene  beds  in  the  State,  overlying  the  Santee  beds  just  mentioned, 


15 

these  fwo  series  of  beds  having  a  combined  thickness  of  about  600 
feet.  His  three  divisions  of  the  Eocene  correspond  to  Ruffin's  "Great 
Carolinian  Bed." 

Tuomey's  Pliocene  deposits  are  irregularly  scattered  over  the 
State,  and  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  his  Pliocene  includes  both 
the  Miocene  and  the  Pliocene  as  now  distinguished.  First  will  be  con- 
sidered that  part  of  his  Pliocene  which  is  known  to  be  Miocene.  He 
found  it  in  patches  resting  on  the  Eocene  at  Goose  Creek,  then  about 
Sumter,  Darlington,  and  Florence,  especially  on  Lynches  River, 
Black  Creek,  and  Swift  Creek.  On  the  Peedee  he  also  found  ex- 
posures of  what  he  called  Pliocene.  Though  this  region  has  not  been 
thoroughly  investigated,  the  supposition  now  is  that  this  too  is  Mio- 
cene. Now  will  be  taken  up  what  has  clearly  been  shown  to  be 
Pliocene.  On  the  Waccamaw  the  Pliocene  was  found  exposed  from 
a  few  miles  above  Conway  on  up  to  or  very  nearly  to  the  North 
Carolina  line.  He  gives  two  sections  of  the  river  bank  which  are, 
in  the  main,  characteristic  of  the  entire  length  of  the  formation  ex- 
posed along  the  Waccamaw : 

(1)  The  section  three  or  four  miles  below  Nixonville  at  the  old 
William  Nixon  Place: 

Yellow    sand,    showing   false   stratification   and   very 

undulating  on  the  surface 30  to  40  feet 

Yellow  Pliocene  marls 8  to  12  feet 

Beds  of  Cretaceous  formation 8  feet 

(2)  Section  on  Tilly's  Lake  at  Nixonville: 

Overlying  loose  sand  and  clay 30  feet 

Pliocene  marl 10  feet 

Cretaceous  formation,  Exogyra  costata 2  feet 

It  may  be  well  to  state  just  here  that  Johnson  found  the  Pliocene 
along  the  Lake  at  Conway  for  some  distance  up  the  stream,  and 
also  found  it  lower  down  the  Waccamaw  than  did  Tuomey.  Lists 
of  fossils  from  the  several  Pliocene  localities  were  given  and  all 
summed  up  in  the  tables  here  reproduced : 

Number  of  species.  Species  recent.  Percent. 

Brachiopoda I  o 

Gastropoda 78  39  50 

Lamellibranchiata 109  47  43 

Cirripedia 2  I  50 

Total 190  87  46 


i6 

Upon  this  percentage  he  rests  his  proof  that  these  beds  are  Plio- 
cene, this  being  about  the  percentage  of  the  fossil  shells  that  are  also 
recent,  claimed  by  Lyell  and  other  English  geologists  as  necessary 
to  constitute  the  Pliocene. 

The  post-Pliocene  was,  in  this  survey  of  Tourney's,  treated  more 
fully  than  ever  before  in  the  State,  and  perhaps  more  fully  than  this 
formation  had  been  treated  anywhere  else  along  the  Coastal  Plain. 
The  work  of  Ruffin  was  reviewed  and  several  additional  localities 
added  to  the  list  of  exposures.  "It  is  composed  of  beds  of  sand,  clay 
and  mud,  containing  fossils,  the  whole  amounting  to  about  sixty  feet 
in  thickness,  overlapping  the  Pliocene  beds  of  Horry  and  George- 
town, and  on  the  rest  of  the  coast  those  of  the  Eocene."  The  section 
of  one  of  the  wells  that  cuts  through  the  post-Pliocene  at  Charleston 
shows : 

Sand  below  which  water  is  found 5  to  6  feet 

Quick  sand  and  clay,  remains  of  trees 9  feet 

Sand  and  small  shells I  foot 

Gravel  and  oyster  shells 2  feet 

Mud  and  Conch  shells 2  feet 

Fine  close  clay  with  young  oyster  shells 3  feet 

Fluff  clay  with  scales  of  mica,  sand  to  Eocene  bed. .   .  .20  feet 

The  following  general  observations  were  made:  That  though 
the  fossiliferous  bed  in  this  section  is  eight  feet  thick,  it  is  rarely 
more  than  four  feet  thick  in  its  exposures  along  the  coast ;  that  this 
is  typical  of  all  sections  along  the  coast,  the  fossiliferous  bed  being 
everywhere  overlaid  by  heavy  beds  of  sand,  closely  similar  to  those 
being  formed  along  the  coast  at  present ;  that  the  fossiliferous  forma- 
tion extends  back  from  the  coast  about  ten  miles,  thinning  out  at  an 
elevation  a  few  feet  above  tide;  that  its  boundary  is  irregular;  that 
this  bed  underlies  the  whole  coast,  and  is  seen  wherever  the  streams 
remove  the  beds  by  which  it  is  covered.  He  found  the  formation 
exposed  on  Price's  Creek  (now  called  White  Point  Creek)  in  Horry 
County  about  a  half-mile  from  the  beach  and  elevated  five  feet  above 
tide.  The  shells  here  were  principally  Venus  mercenaria,  Ostrea 
Virginica  and  Area  incongrua.  Also  in  several  other  places  in  Horry 
County  and  in  Georgetown  County  exposures  were  found.  At 
Laurel  Hill  bluff  the  fossil  bed  was  observed  eight  feet  above  tide, 
and  in  digging  Winyah  Canal  post-Pliocene  shells  were  met  with, 
showing  that  the  surface  sands  are  underlaid  by  it.  The  nature  of 
the  formation  here  was  found  to  be  very  much  like  that  of  the  bed 


17 

underlying  Charleston.  From  this  region  the  formation  was  traced 
along  through  Charleston  County  by  several  exposures.  On  the 
Santee  at  Mazyck's  Ferry,  the  bed  corresponds  to  the  stiff  blue  clay 
penetrated  in  the  wells  at  Charleston.  It  was  found  on  the  Ashley 
near  Bee's  Ferry,  about  a  quarter  of  a  mile  from  the  river  and  five 
feet  above  tide.  It  was  also  investigated  on  the  shores  of  several 
inlets  just  below  Charleston  and  on  down  to  Beaufort;  on  Stono 
River;  on  Abapoola  Creek,  and  elsewhere  on  John's  Island;  on 
Wadmalaw  Sound  at  Simmons  Bluff;  and  at  several  places  around 
Beaufort.  Taking  all  these  exposures  from  White  Point  to  Beaufort 
into  consideration,  Tuomey  was  evidently  right  in  saying  that  the 
fossiliferous  beds  of  the  post-Pliocene  underlay  the  sands  of  the 
whole  South  Carolina  coast  and  extended  inland  eight  or  ten  miles. 

In  addition  to  the  discussion  of  these  four  formations,  the  alluvium 
deposits  and  the  changes  along  the  coast  were  discussed.  Tuomey 
did  not  assent  to  the  opinion  that  the  coast  region  is  gradually  sub- 
siding, but  rather  thought  these  appearances  of  subsidence  were 
due  to  the  encroachment  of  the  sea  upon  the  land. 

The  plates  of  fossil  forms  which  were  to  make  a  part  of  this  vol- 
ume were  so  badly  used  by  the  printers  that  it  was  decided  to  dis- 
pense with  them.  This  defect  in  the  volume,  according  to  Professor 
Holmes,  was  the  object  of  common  regret  to  the  members  of  the 
American  Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science,  which  held 
its  meeting  of  1850  at  Charleston.  At  the  urgent  solicitation  of 
such  scientists  as  Agassiz,  Gould  and  Bache,  Tuomey  and  Holmes 
undertook  a  separate  publication  of  these  plates,  together  with 
descriptions  of  the  fossils  figured.  The  result  is  their  ''Pliocene 
Fossils  of  South  Carolina,"  issued  at  Charleston  in  1857. 

In  the  meantime  Professor  Holmes  had  been  at  work  on  the 
geology  of  Charleston  and  the  immediate  region  around  the  city. 
His  work  was  mainly  on  the  Pleistocene  formation.  On  Ashley 
River,  on  Wadmalaw  Sound  at  Simmons  Bluff,  on  Stono  River,  on 
Abapoola  Creek,  and  Doctor's  Swamp  and  elsewhere  on  John's 
Island,  and  at  other  localities,  he  had  made  collections  of  fossils  of 
this  formation.  As  a  result  of  this  study  we  have  several  papers 
along  from  1849  to  T86o,  and  in  1860  his  "Post-Pliocene  Fossils  of 
South  Carolina."  Holmes  did  not  attempt  so  much  to  trace  the 
extent  of  formations  or  to  correlate  beds ;  his  work  was  rather  that  of 
a  paleontologist  and  serves  as  a  foundation  for  the  man  who  would 
endeavor  to  establish  geological  correlation  and  succession  and  ex- 
tent of  beds.  In  addition  to  the  usual  molluscan  fossils,  there  were 

2— P.     D. 


i8 

remains  of  many  vertebrata  found,  especially  on  Ashley  River,  about 
forty  species.  Professor  Agassiz,  who  visited  the  region  with  Holmes, 
described  it  as  "the  greatest  cemetery  he  ever  saw."  In  a  paper 
before  the  American  Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science, 
March,  1850,  Holmes  described  at  some  length  this  very  interesting 
locality.  In  depressions  in  the  Eocene  marls,  says  he,  which  are 
exposed  for  several  miles  along  the  Ashley  up  stream  from  a 
point  about  a  mile  below  old  Ashley  Ferry,  mingled  with  detritus 
and  molluscan  fossils,  were  found  the  remains  of  many  vertebrate 
animals.  They  were  also  found  in  the  bed  of  loose  gravelly  sand 
and  among  the  fragments  of  Eocene  marl  which  are  largely  robbed 
of  their  lime  and  have  their  interstices  filled  in  with  blue  mud  and  in 
places  with  peat,  the  whole  being  somewhat  in  a  bed  just  above  and 
partly  mixed  in  with  the  sand.  At  just  what  age  these  beds  con- 
taining the  vertebrate  remains  were  deposited,  he  did  not  attempt  to 
say  further  than  that  they  had  been  deposited  since  the  Eocene,  and 
that  the.  Miocene  and  Pliocene  were  generally  thought  to  be  absent 
from  this  region,  and  that  then  the  beds  must  be  post-Pliocene  or  Re- 
cent. In  his  post-Pliocene  text  he  unhestitatingly  pronounces  these 
beds  to  be  post-Pliocene,  and  enters  descriptions  and  cuts  of  the  ver- 
tebrate fossils  found  in  them.  In  this  part  of  the  work  Professor 
Joseph  Leidy,  of  Philadelphia,  rendered  valuable  service.  He  was 
greatly  interested  in  the  Ashley  River  vertebrate  remains,  visited 
Holmes  and  made  collections  for  himself.  He  differed  with  Holmes 
in  some  particulars,  regarding  some  of  the  forms  which  Holmes  re- 
garded post-Pliocene  as  recent.  He  wrote  descriptions  of  the  fossil 
vertebrata,  and  these  make  up  a  considerable  part  of  the  volume. 
Holmes  did  not  attempt  to  trace  the  non-fossiliferous  Pleistocene 
back  from  the  coast,  but  neither  did  Rufrm  nor  Tourney.  In  fact, 
Tourney  says  that  owing  to  the  blending  of  the  strata  it  is  almost 
impossible  to  distinguish  the  arenaceous  beds  of  the  different  Ter- 
tiary formations.  "The  sandy  beds  of  the  Buhrstone  are  inter- 
mingled with  those  of  the  Pliocene,  which  pass  into  the  superin- 
cumbent beds  of  the  post-Pliocene,  and  the  latter  are  in  turn  blended 
with  the  moving  sands  of  the  coast." 

From  1856  on  through  a  few  years,  Mr.  O.  M.  Lieber,  State 
geologist,  made  his  annual  reports  on  the  survey  of  South  Carolina. 
For  the  most  part  these  reports  treat  of  the  Piedmont  portion  of  the 
State  and  are  largely  of  an  economic  nature.  He  does,  however,  in 
the  report  for  1856  touch  upon  Pleistocene  formations.  He,  too, 
had  his  tilt  at  the  great  question  of  the  subsidence  of  the  coast,  and 


19 

in  an  article  published  in  the  American  Journal  of  Science  in  1859, 
he  treats  changes  along  the  coast  and  puts  himself  on  record  as  a 
believer  that  the  coast  is  subsiding. 

About  1870  the  phosphate  industry  of  the  State  had  grown  to 
such  proportions  as  to  make  the  question  of  the  origin  of  the  phos- 
phoric acid,  of  the  extent  of  the  beds,  of  the  varying  richness  and 
probability  of  continuance  a  matter  of  investigation  for  geologists. 
Dr.  U.  C.  Shepherd,  Prof.  N.  S.  Shaler,  and  Prof.  F.  S.  Holmes 
were  among  the  number  to  turn  their  attention  to  these  phosphate 
deposits.  The  fragments  of  Eocene  (as  then  considered)  marl, 
worn  and  robbed  of  their  lime  and  giving  a  "naphthous  odor"  when 
rubbed  together,  that  Tuomey  and  Holmes,  and  perhaps  others, 
had  noticed  along  the  Ashley  as  early  as  1850,  were  found  to  be 
rich  phosphate.  The  question  as  to  how  they  were  enriched  links 
them  to  the  Pleistocene,  for  it  is  generally  thought  now  that  the 
phosphoric  acid  has  been  supplied  from  the  offal  and  bones  of  the 
vertebrate  animals  whose  fossils  Holmes  claims  for  the  Pleistocene. 
Be  that  as  it  may,  Shaler  studied  the  geology  of  the  Carolina  coast 
region,  and  in  his  article  in  the  United  States  Coast  Survey,  Report 
of  1870,  he  contributed  something  to  the  knowledge  of  South  Caro- 
lina Pleistocene.  In  general,  he  observed:  That  the  two  or  three 
tiers  of  islands  along  the  coast  from  Winyah  Bay  southward  are 
separated  from  one  another  and  from  the  mainland  by  tide-water 
creeks  that  are  for  the  most  part  parallel  to  the  shore  line,  and  that 
therefore  the  stream  channels  are  not  the  result  of  glacier  scourings, 
as  is  the  case  along  the  coast  of  Maine;  that  the  origin  of  these 
stream  channels,  since  no  sign  of  aerial  erosion  could  be  found,  must 
be  attributed  to  the  work  of  tidal  currents  before  this  region  was  up- 
lifted the  last  time  or  just  as  it  was  being  uplifted;  that  according 
to  Professor  Agassiz,  the  Florida  mole  had  not  been  built  in  early 
Pleistocene  times,  and  that  therefore  the  Gulf  Stream  came  in  much 
closer  to  the  shore  then  than  now,  and  its  power  as  a  scouring  agent 
was  more  vigorous;  that  there  is  no  real  subsidence  of  the  coast, 
the  seeming  subsidence  being  due  to  the  land  being  undermined  by 
the  waves  and  to  the  decay  of  considerable  thicknesses  of  vegetable 
matter,  bringing  about  a  settling  down  of  the  overlying  sands. 

There  remains  of  this  historic  review  only  to  mention  briefly  the 
work  done  in  the  region  within  the  last  quarter  of  a  century,  such 
work  being  used  as  a  basis  for  another  division  of  this  paper.  In 
1 88 1  Professor  Leidy  discussed  "Vertebrate  Remains,  Chiefly  from 
South  Carolina."  In  1882  we  have  the  report  of  the  Committee  on 


20 

the  Artesian  Well  of  Charleston,  which  is  remarkably  full  of  scien- 
tific knowledge,  especial  pains  having  been  taken  to  notice  everything 
that  came  up  and  from  what  depth.  In  1883  and  1884  tne  "Agri- 
cultural Reports"  of  the  State  were  made  by  Major  Harry  Ham- 
mond; they  are  of  not  much  worth  geologically,  being  almost 
altogether  agricultural.  In  1888  "Three  Formations  of  the  Atlantic 
Slope,"  by  W.  J.  McGee,  was  published  in  the  American  Journal  of 
Science.  This  treatise  does  not  deal  directly  with  these  formations 
in  South  Carolina.  In  1890  McGee,  in  his  "Appomattox  Forma- 
tion," touched  slightly  on  what  he  considered  the  continuation  of 
this  formation  into  the  State.  In  1891,  in  his  "Lafayette  Formation/' 
he  gave  several  pages  to  South  Carolina.  In  the  same  year  J.  A. 
Holmes,  whose  knowledge  of  the  geology  of  the  State  is  extensive, 
gave  an  account  of  the  mineralogical,  geological  and  agricultural 
surveys  of  the  State  in  the  Elisha  Mitchell  Science  Society  Journal. 
In  1892,  in  the  second  part  of  the  third  volume  of  the  Transactions 
of  the  Wagner  Free  Institute  of  Science,  Dr.  Dall  discusses  the 
marine  Pliocene  beds  of  the  Carolinas,  telling  of  the  work  of  C.  W. 
Johnson  on  the  Waccamaw,  and  giving  a  list  of  Pliocene  fossils  from 
the  Waccamaw  beds.  In  the  same  year  Dr.  Dall,  with  the  help  of 
G.  D.  Harris,  prepared  an  extensive  description  of  the  Neocene  of 
North  America,  Bulletin  No.  84  of  the  United  States  Geological 
Survey ;  in  this  the  South  Carolina  formations  are  treated  with  some 
degree  of  fullness.  In  1896  N.  H.  Darton,  in  "Artesian  Well  Pros- 
pects in  the  Atlantic  Coastal  Plain,"  Bulletin  No.  138,  U.  S.  G.  S., 
and  in  "Notes  on  Relations  of  the  Coastal  Plain  Region  in  South 
Carolina,"  Bulletin,  Geological  Society  of  America,  gave  what  is 
still  believed,  in  the  main,  to  be  the  true  order  of  beds  in  the  parts 
of  the  State  that  he  investigated.  In  1905  L.  C.  Glenn,  in  "Under- 
ground Waters  of  the  United  States — South  Carolina,"  Water  Sup- 
ply and  Irrigation  Paper  No.  114,  U.  S.  G.  S.,  gives  a  few  pages  to 
the  discussion  of  the  succession  and  extent  of  the  Coastal  Plain  series 
of  the  State. 

II.   GEOGRAPHICAL  DISTRIBUTION   OF  THE  PLEIS- 
TOCENE OF  THE  COASTAL  PLAIN. 

The  Pleistocene  formation  of  the  Atlantic  coast  is  generally  de- 
scribed as  extending  from  the  terminal  moraine  in  north-central  New 
Jersey  through  Maryland  and  Virginia  and  the  South  Atlantic  and 
Gulf  States  on  to  the  Mexican  border  line  and  beyond.  It  every- 
where unconformably  overlies  the  earlier  formations  and  in  places 


:.  •  •         '  8$;  21 

overlaps  upon  the  crystalline  area  of  the  Piedmont  Plateau,  espe- 
cially along  stream  channels  cut  in  these  rocks.  It  is  divisible 
throughout  this  stretch  of  country  into  two  general  divisions :  ( I ) 
That  just  along  the  present  shore  line,  extending  back  a  few  miles 
only,  composed  of  sands,  clays  and  loams  fairly  well  stratified  and 
containing  fossils,  in  most  cases  overlaid  by  recent  sands  and  coarser 
material.  (2)  That  extending  from  the  old  Pleistocene  shore  line  and 
in  some  cases,  from  up  the  stream  channels  some  distance  down  to 
within  a  few  miles  of  the  present  shore  line,  to  where  it  intergrades 
into  the  fossiliferous  Pleistocene.  The  beds  of  this  second  division, 
consisting  of  sand,  gravel  and  (in  the  northern  part)  bowlders,  mixed 
with  finer  sands,  clays  and  loams,  are  not  so  well  stratified  as  are  the 
beds  of  the  other  division,  and  contain  no  marine  invertebrate  fossils. 
It  is  of  much  greater  area  than  the  first  division,  and  is  the  surface 
formation  throughout  much  of  the  Coastal  Plain  region.  In  the  north- 
ern half  of  this  stretch  of  country,  the  non-fossiliferous  portion  of  the 
Pleistocene  or  the  Columbia  seems  to  be  capable  of  a  ready  division 
into  two  or  more  formations.  This  is  especially  true  in  New  Jersey  and 
Maryland,  where  it  has  been  studied  more  thoroughly  than  else- 
where. Also  in  Virginia  divisions  have  been  made.  In  the  southern 
part,  especially  in  South  Carolina,  no  suitable  basis  for  subdivisions 
has  as  yet  been*  found. 

Outside  of  this  broad  continual  mantle  of  Pleistocene  or  Columbia 
sands,  there  are  disconnected  areas  of  it  to  the  north  of  New  Jersey, 
along  the  coast  of  New  York  and 'New  England  and  on  the  neighbor- 
ing islands,  and  indeed  on  up  to  Labrador  and  Greenland.  It  is  well 
to  note  here  that  the  Pleistocene  is  generally  considered  to  have  been 
ushered  in  with  the  first  great  advance  of  the  ice-sheet  from  the 
North  into  more  southernly  latitudes — with  the  Glacial  Epoch,  in  a 
word.  Therefore,  in  this  northern  part  of  the  formation,  the  deposits 
consist  largely  of  the  product  of  glacial  action ;  clay,  sand  and  bowl- 
ders, arranged  in  the  way  peculiar  to  glacial  action  or  to  the  influence 
of  glacial  action.  Of  course,  where  the  deposits  have  been  subma- 
rine, the  material  may  have  been  reworked  and  changed  from  strictly 
glacial  deposits.  The  Pleistocene  deposits  about  Lake  Champlain 
and  along  the  St.  Lawrence  and  elsewhere  along  the  coast  north  of 
Maine  may,  in  this  discussion,  be  set  aside  and  the  tracing  begin  with 
Maine  and  extend  only  to  Florida.  This  includes  the  Pleistocene  that 
is  closely  related  to  this  formation  in  South  Carolina.  It  seems  best 
to  treat  the  Pleistocene  by  States. 


22 

MAINE. 

According  to  Packard,1  there  are  two  distinct  horizons  of  the 
Pleistocene  in  Maine  as  is  indicated  by  life-forms.  The  older  is 
found  along  the  coast  at  about  high-tide  mark  at  the  bottom  of  the 
bowlder  clay.  The  younger  occupies  the  coast  region  from  the  shore 
line  to  fifty  miles  or  more  inland,  and  ranging  from  25  to  300  feet  in 
altitude.  J.  D.  Dana,  in  his  "Manual  of  Geology,"  fourth  edition, 
page  983,  makes  the  statement  that  the  Pleistocene  exists  along  the 
coast  of  Maine,  and  extends  back  from  the  shore  line  some  miles  at 
different  elevations  up  to  225  feet.  From  the  places  he  cites,  the 
Pleistocene  localities  seem  to  be  in  two  belts;  one  just  along  the 
shore  line,  and  the  other  back  at  a  distance  of. fifty  miles  almost 
parallel  with  the  shore  line.  The  following  Pleistocene  fossils  have 
been  reported  from  these  localities :  Leda  penula,  Leda  tenuisulcata, 
Leda  minuta,  Yoldia  glacilis,Pecten  Groenlandicus,  Pecten  islandicus, 
Cardium  islandicus,  Astarte  Banksii,  Astarte  elliptic  a,  Astarte  cas- 
tanea,  Thracia  Conradi,  Macoma  fragilis,  Macoma  sabulosa,  Saxicava 
arctica,  Mactra  ovalis,  Mya  truncata,  Mya  arenaria,  Pholas  crispata, 
Natica  clausa,  Lunatia  Groenlandica,  Lunatia  heros.  The  strata 
containing  these  shells  of  undoubted  Pleistocene  Age  are  for  the  most 
part  composed  of  clay,  in  which  there  is  a  generous  intermixture  of 
bowlders. 

NEW  HAMPSHIRE. 

According  to  Dall  and  Harris,  in  Bulletin  No.  84,  United  States 
Geological  Survey,  there  is  in  the  southeastern  part  of  Portsmouth  a 
deposit  of  blue  plastic  clay,  containing  Nucula,  Macoma  and  a  few 
recent  forms,  which  is  doubtless  of  the  same  age  as  the  Pleistocene 
just  described  as  occurring  on  the  coast  of  Maine. 

MASSACHUSETTS. 

There  are  several  exposures  of  fossiliferous  Pleistocene  beds  along 
the  coast  of  Massachusetts  and  on  the  neighboring  islands.  Later  in 
this  paper  there  is  given  a  partial  list  of  Pleistocene  fossils  found  at 
Sankoty  Head  on  the  Island  of  Nantucket.  The  strata  here  consist 
of  clay  at  the  base,  of  thirty-three  feet  of  sand,  gravel  and  clay  con  • 


1  "Results  of  Observations  on  the  Drift  Phenomena  of  Labrador  and  the 
Atlantic  Coast  Southward"  (Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  2d  sen,  Vol.  XLI,  pp.  30-32)  ; 
"Observations  on  the  Glacial  Phenomena  of  Labrador  and  Maine,  etc."  (Am. 
Jour.  Sci.,  2d  ser./Vol.  XLIV,  pp.  117,  118). 


23 

taining  fossils,  forty-two  feet  of  sand  and  gravel  without  fossils,  one 
foot  of  peat,  and  at  the  top  of  the  section  six  feet  of  dune  sand.  The 
species  of  shells  in  the  beds,  according  to  Verrill,1  indicate  a  warmer 
climate  by  15°  F.  for  the  deposition  of  the  lower  bed  than  for  that  of 
the  upper;  7o°-75°  F.  for  the  lower  and  55°-6o°  F.  for  the  upper- 
one  a  warmer  climate  than  now  prevails,  the  other  a  colder.  On 
Martha's  Vineyard  almost  all  the  superficial  deposits  are  of  Glacial 
or  Recent  age,  the  pre-Glacial  outcropping  only  at  Gay  Head  and 
Chilmark  Cliffs.  On  the  island  of  Nanshon,  northwest  of  Martha's 
Vineyard,  almost  all  the  surface  formations  are  of  such  a  nature  as 
to  denote  glacial  action,  if  not  in  the  deposition  at  least  in  the  wear- 
ing and  rearranging  of  material  already  deposited  during  some  pre- 
ceding period.  Shaler  is  disposed  to  consider  "these  sands  more 
nearly  related  to  the  deposits  of  the  Glacial  Age  than  to  those  of  the 
preceding  series." 

RHODE  ISLAND  AND  CONNECTICUT. 

Here  and  there  along  the  shores  of  these  two  States,  especially  of 
Rhode  Island,  have  been  found  exposures  of  the  Pleistocene  forma- 
tion, containing  characteristic  fossils.  In  the  neighborhood  of  New 
Haven,  on  Long  Island  Sound,  the  Pleistocene  terrace  from  an  eleva- 
tion of  about  twenty  feet  slopes  evenly  toward  the  Sound.  Not  much 
has  been  written  on  the  extent  of  the  Pleistocene  in  these  two 
States. 

NEW  YORK. 

Staten  Island,  Long  Island  and  Gardiner's  Island  bear  in  their  sur- 
face formations  evidences  of  glacial  action.  The  old  terminal  mo- 
raine extends  across  Long  Island.  The  sands  and  gravels  of  Gardi- 
ner's Island,  according  to  Sanderson  Smith2,  contain  twenty-five 
species  of  fossil  forms,  of  which  all  but  two  now  inhabit  the  waters 
South  of  Cape  Cod.  They  indicate  that  the  climate  under  which  they 
lived  was  colder  than  that  which  now  prevails  on  the  same  coast.  In 
all  this  region  from  New  York  to  Maine,  the  Pleistocene  deposits 
are  so  intermingled  with  the  drift  and  so  covered  by  it  that  they  have 
not  been  worked  out  so  satisfactorily  as  otherwise  might  have  been 
the  case. 


1KOn  the  Post- Pliocene  Fossils  of  Sankoty  Head,  Nantucket  Island"  (Am. 
Jour.  Sci.,  3d  sen,  Vol.  X,  pp.  364-75). 

2  "Notice  of  a  Post- Pliocene  Deposit  on  Gardiner's  Island,  Suffolk  County, 
New  York"  (New  York  Lyceum  Nat.  Hist.,  Annals,  Vol.  VIII,  pp.  149-151). 


24 

NEW  JERSEY. 

Beginning  with  New  Jersey  south  of  the  terminal  moraine,  how- 
ever, there  is  better  opportunity  to  study  the  formations  of  the  Pleis- 
tocene Age  than  in  the  country  to  the  north.  This  State  has  been 
worked  and  reworked  by  able  geologists.  The  most  thorough  work, 
especially  for  the  Pleistocene,  has  been  done  by  Professor  Salisbury, 
working  through  a  number  of  years  with  one  or  more  assistants. 
The  Pleistocene  has  been  traced  and  mapped,  and  described  as  con- 
stituting a  large  part  of  the  surficial  deposits  of  the  State  in  that  por- 
tion lying  to  the  east  and  south  of  a  northeast-southwest  line  running 
from  near  the  mouth  of  the  Raritan  River  on  to  Trenton  on  the  Dela- 
ware, with  a  few  isolated  patches  lying  to  the  northwest  of  this.  The 
Pleistocene  here  has  been  divided  into  two  or  more  divisions,  the 
ground  for  which,  in  the  absence  of  fossils,  has  been  based  upon  dif- 
ferences in  the  physical  constituents  of  the  several  formations  com- 
bined with  the  topographical  relations.  The  Bridgeton  formation, 
earliest  Pleistocene,  rests  unconformably  upon  the  Beacon  Hill  for- 
mation (which  is  either  very  late  Miocene  or  else  Lafayette  or  Plio- 
cene) and  older  formations.  The  material  is  heterogeneous,  consist- 
ing of  bowlders,  large  and  small,  of  gravel,  coarse  sand  and  fine,  the 
coarse  sand  and  gravel  predominating.  The  material  has  evidently 
been  derived  by  glacial  and  stream  action  from  the  older  Beacon 
Hill,  the  Miocene,  the  Triassic,  the  crystalline  schists,  and  from  cer- 
tain Paleozoic  formations  varying  with  the  locality.  This  formation 
extends  in  patches  across  the  middle  portion  of  that  part  of  the  State 
occupied  surficially  by  the  Pleistocene.  The  Pensauken,  Middle 
Pleistocene,  extends  in  remnants  across  the  State  in  northeast-south- 
west direction  in  two  belts — one  along  the  trough  from  Raritan  Bay 
to  Trenton  and  Salem,  and  then  down  the  Delaware  River ;  the  other 
in  the  eastern  part  of  the  State,  almost  paralleling  the  shore  line  and 
extending  back  only  a  few  miles  from  the  shore.  The  Cape  May 
formation,  late  Pleistocene,  covers  the  border  of  the  State  along  the 
Atlantic  from  Raritan  Bay  to  Cape  May;  then  along  Delaware 
Bay  and  River  to  Trenton,  everywhere  extending  back  several 
miles  from  the  shore  line,  and  up  stream  valleys  in  some  cases 
twenty-five  or  thirty  miles.  It  is  most  abundantly  developed  in  the 
southern  part  of  the  State — in  Cape  May,  Cumberland"  and  Salem 
counties.  The  material  of  the  Cape  May  formation  consists  of 
gravel,  sand  and  loam,  and  indicates,  from  its  slight  elevation  (forty 
or  fifty  feet)  and  from  the  absence  of  bowlders,  that  it  was  deposited 
under  less  vigorous  stream  action  than  were  the  Pensauken  and 


25 

Bridgeton.  Indeed,  it  seems  that  the  successive  Pleistocene  submer- 
gences of  this  State  became  slighter  and  the  glacial  influence  less 
pronounced  as  the  Recent  period  was  approached. 

PENNSYLVANIA  AND  DELAWARE. 

The  extreme  eastern  border  of  Pennsylvania  along  the  Delaware, 
south  of  Trenton,  has  surficial  deposits  of  Pleistocene  corresponding 
to  the  Pensauken  and  Cape  May  of  New  Jersey,  just  across  the 
river.  Delaware,  lying  between  New  Jersey  and  Pennsylvania  on 
the  one  hand  and  Maryland  on  the  other,  is  largely  covered  with  the 
Pleistocene.  The  divisions  of  the  Pleistocene  in  Maryland  corre- 
spond to  those  in  New  Jersey ;  and  the  Delaware  Pleistocene,  though 
almost  no  recent  work  has  been  done  on  it,  is  undoubtedly  capable 
of  being  divided  in  the  same  way. 

MARYLAND. 

The  Pleistocene  in  Maryland  consists  of  a  mantle  of  unconsoli- 
dated  loams,  sands  and  gravels,  covering  most  of  the  earlier  deposits 
of  the  lowland  and  lapping  well  up  on  the  Piedmont  Plateau  in 
places.  McGee,  Darton,  Shattuck  and  others  have  worked  on  the 
relationships  between  the  different  phases  of  the  Pleistocene  and 
earlier  formations.  The  Columbia  or  Pleistocene  has  been  divided 
variously  by  the  different  workers  in  the  field.  One  division  makes 
a  fluvial  and  an  interfluvial  phase,  together  with  a  littoral  or  low- 
level  deposit.  The  fluvial  consists  of  deltas  deposited  under  water  by 
those  streams  in  whose  valleys  they  now  occur  when  the  land  stood 
lower  than  it  does  today.  It  is  subject  to  further  division,  the  lower 
member  being  composed  of  sand,  gravel  and  huge  bowlders,  the 
upper  of  clay  and  loam.  The  material  as  a  whole  is  coarser  near  the 
mouths  of  gorges,  where  the  streams  leave  the  Piedmont  Plateau, 
than  in  the  more  remote  parts  of  the  deltas.  The  interfluvial  phase 
possesses  no  regular  stratification,  but  is  an  indiscriminate  mixture  of 
clay,  sand  and  gravel,  water  fashioned  but  not  fluvial,  which  mantles 
the  divides.  The  low-level  deposit,  just  along  the  shore  and  in  some 
cases  extending  up  the  rivers,  contains  in  some  of  its  exposures  fos- 
sils of  mollusca  and  other  forms.  Another  division,  that  of  Darton, 
separates  the  Columbia  into  an  earlier  and  a  later  Columbia.  The 
Columbia  rests  unconformably  upon  the  Lafayette  or  Pliocene. 
These  three  formations,  the  Lafayette  and  the  two  members  of  the 
Columbia,  are  found  in  the  upper  part  of  the  stream  channels  which 


26 

they  occupy  in  the  following  order :  At  the  top,  Lafayette ;  then,  on 
a  middle  terrace,  the  earlier  Columbia,  and  farther  down  the  later 
Columbia.  This  indicates  clearly  that  the  successive  submergences 
were  slighter  and  slighter.  Along  the  coast  and  back  from  the 
stream  channels  these  formations  are  not  developed  in  terraces  so 
plainly,  but  in  a  more  continued  series  with  an  erosion  break  be- 
tween the  Lafayette  and  the  earlier  Columbia. 

The  latest  division  of  the  surficial  deposits  of  the  Pleistocene  in 
Maryland  is  threefold :  Sunderland,  Wicomico  and  Talbot.  The 
Sunderland  is  considerably  developed  in  Prince  George's,  Charles, 
St.  Mary's  and  Calvert  counties,  lying  against  the  Piedmont  or 
lapping  around  the  edges  of  the  Lafayette.  The  material  composing 
it  consists  of  gravel,  sand  and  loam,  containing  occasional  bowlders. 
The  base  of  the  Sunderland  is  about  90  feet  above  tide,  and  in  places 
reaches  170  feet  above  tide.  The  Wicomico  consists  structurally  of 
material  very  much  like  that  of  the  Sunderland,  but  the  proportion 
of  sand  and  loam  is  larger.  The  base  of  this  formation  is  about 
forty  to  fifty  feet  above  tide  level  in  southern  Maryland,  but  higher 
in  altitude  to  the  north.  The  Talbot  formation  is  a  terrace  of  vary- 
ing width,  lapping  around  the  edges  of  the  Wicomico,  attaining  a 
height  of  thirty  to  fifty  feet.  Any  sort  of  material  that  enters  into 
the  composition  of  the  other  terraces  may  be  found  in  the  Talbot, 
but  the  percentage  of  loam  is  greater,  and  it  also  contains  lenses  of 
greenish-blue  clay,  in  which  are  embedded  plant  remains.  The  Corn- 
field Harbor  clays,  carrying  remains  of  marine  and  brackish-water 
animals,  and  also  similar  deposits  five  miles  south  of  Cedar  Point 
are  referred  to  the  Talbot  formation.  This  is  an  instance  of  the  grad- 
ing over  of  the  Columbia  sands  of  the  region  back  from  the  coast 
into  the  littoral  or  low-level  Pleistocene.  The  base  of  the  Talbot 
terrace  is  irregular,  lying  above  tide  at  some  places  and  below  at 
others,  but  the  top  where  it  borders  the  sea  cliff  is  usually  limited 
by  the  forty-five  or  fifty  foot  contour.  Large  areas  of  Wicomico  and 
Talbot  have  been  mapped  on  the  "western  shore"  of  Maryland,  but 
it  is  on  the  "eastern  shore"  that  they  attain  their  most  marked  de- 
velopment. 

The  following,  according  to  Shattuck1,  may  have  been  the  order 
and  extent  of  the  later  Coastal  Plain  formations  in  Maryland :  Mio- 
cene elevation  and  erosion;  subsidence  and  deposition  of  Lafayette; 


1  "The  Pleistocene  Problem  of  the  Northern  Atlantic  Coastal  Plain"  (Am. 
Geol.,  Vol.  XXVIII,  pp.  87-107,  1901). 


27 

elevation  and  extensive  erosion ;  subsidence  and  deposition  of  the 
Sunderland  around  the  edges  of  the  Lafayette ;  elevation  and  erosion ; 
subsidence  and  deposition  of  the  Wicomico  terrace  about  the  margin 
of  the  Sunderland ;  elevation  and  erosion ;  subsidence  and  deposition 
of  the  Talbot  about  the  margin  of  the  Wicomico;  elevation  and  par- 
tial erosion  of  the  Talbot ;  subsidence  and  deposition  of  the  Recent 
terrace  about  the  edges  of  the  Talbot. 

This  division  of  the  Pleistocene  in  Maryland  has  been  entered  into 
rather  more  fully  than  may  seem  necessary  for  the  immediate  pur- 
pose, but  is  put  here  because  of  the  fact  that  it  is  to  be  referred  to  in 
treating  the  South  Carolina  Pleistocene.  The  same  may  be  said  for 
the  discussion  of  the  surface  formations  of  New  Jersey. 

In  Maryland  it  seems  that  the  later  Columbia  comprises  both  the 
Talbot  and  the  Wicomico,  while  the  earlier  Columbia  finds  its  equiv- 
alent in  the  Sunderland.  The  indications  are  that  the  successive  sub- 
sidences were  greater  in  the  northern  part  of  the  formation  than  in 
the  southern.  The  materials  deposited  contain  larger  bowlders  in  the 
northern  than  in  the  southern  part.  The  successive  submergences 
seem  to  have  been  less  as  the  Recent  period  was  approached.  This 
conclusion  fits  in  well  with  the  observations  made  in  New  Jersey. 

VIRGINIA. 

The  division  of  the  Pleistocene  or  Columbia  into  fluvial  and 
interfluvial  phases  in  this  State  is  very  similar  to  the  same  division 
in  Maryland,  and  need  not  be  given  again  in  detail.  However,  the 
indications  are  that  the  successive  Pleistocene  submergences  were  not 
so  deep  as  they  were  farther  north.  The  interfluvial  phase  is  beginning 
to  be  the  prominent  one,  and  farther  south  the  fluvial  phase  is  almost 
lost  sight  of  altogether,  and  the  interfluvial  is  the  all-important  one. 
The  material  here,  though  in  the  main  the  same  as  that  in  Maryland, 
contains  relatively  much  smaller  bowlders  in  the  basal  member,  and 
farther  south  the  bowlders  disappear.  As  yet  no  fossiliferous  Pleisto- 
cene beds  have  been  reported  from  Virginia,  but  we  are  not  to  con- 
clude that  there  are  none  along  the  Virginia  coast.  The  supposition 
is  that  they  are  there,  either  unexposed  or  exposed  in  some  little- fre- 
quented localities.  The  Columbia  here,  as  elsewhere  along  the  mid- 
dle Atlantic  coast,  extends  well  inland  to  the  inner  edge  of  the 
Coastal  Plain  region,  and  together  with  the  Lafayette  is  almost 
everywhere  the  surficial  formation.  Erosion  has  in  places  carried 
it  away,  and  left  the  Pliocene  or  Miocene  or  other  older  formation 
exposed.  It  is  everywhere  a  mere  superficial  capping,  varying  in 


28 

thickness  from  ten  to  thirty  feet.  Virginia  seems  to  be  the  region  of 
change  for  this  formation.  In  the  region  to  the  west  and  north  of 
Washington,  the  earlier  Columbia  is  at  high  altitudes,  and  the  later 
lies  on  the  low  terraces  in  the  deeper  portions  of  the  depressions,  but 
to  the  east  and  south  the  later  Columbia  lies  in  regular  succession  on 
the  earlier.  As  we  go  farther  south  from  Virginia,  the  later  Colum- 
bia advances  more  upon  the  earlier,  and  in  South  Carolina,  where  it 
is  almost  impossible  to  make  any  division  at  all,  perhaps  it  is  that 
the  later  has  entirely  overlapped  the  earlier. 

NORTH  CAROLINA. 

In  this  State  the  interfluvial  phase  of  the  Columbia  has  almost 
eclipsed  the  fluvial  in  extent  and  in  importance.  The  Pleistocene 
formation  here  is  so  closely  similar  in  occurrence  and  in  composition 
to  the  same  formation  in  South  Carolina  that  it  need  not  be  spoken 
of  at  length.  About  1840  Conrad  wrote  a  description  of  a  Pleisto- 
cene locality  on  Neuse  River,  and  gave  a  list  of  the  fossils  found 
there1,  thirty-four  in  number.  But  upon  further  investigation  this 
locality  has  been  classed  as  Pliocene  within  late  years.  However, 
there  are  some  fossiliferous  Pleistocene  beds  along  the  coast  of  North 
Carolina.  As  in  South  Carolina,  these  beds  are  confined  to  a  belt 
along  the  shore  extending  inland  only  a  few  miles. 

SOUTH  CAROLINA. 

Inasmuch  as  a  separate  discussion  of  the  Pleistocene  of  this  State 
is  to  be  given  in  this  paper,  nothing  further  need  be  said  concerning 
it  here. 

GEORGIA. 

Very  little  has  been  done  upon  the  geology  of  the  Coastal  Plain 
of  this  State.  But  Couper  and  McCallie  have  given  brief  descriptions 
of  the  region,  and  McGee,  in  "Lafayette  Formation,"  gives  a  few 
pages  to  Georgia.  The  Coastal  Plain  extends  over  all  that  part  of 
Georgia  lying  south  of  a  line  running  from  Augusta  westward  across 
the  State  by  Columbus  and  Macon.  Here,  as  elsewhere  along  the 
margin  of  the  region,  the  different  formations  advance  in  varying 
degree.  The  Pleistocene  sometimes  comes  so  far  inland  as  to  rest 
upon  the  Piedmont  crystallines,  and  at  other -places  upon  the  Potomac, 


1  "Observations    on    a    Portion    of    the    Atlantic    Tertiary    Region,    etc." 
(National  Inst.  Proc.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  171-94). 


29 

Cretaceous,  Eocene,  Miocene  or  Pliocene.  There  is  here  that  alter- 
nation of  "sand  hills"  and  "red  hills"  which  is  characteristic  of  North 
and  South  Carolina  in  their  central  areas.  But  farther  toward  the 
sea  the  Columbia  or  Pleistocene  is  the  surface  formation  com- 
pletely concealing  the  Lafayette  or  Pliocene  beneath.  The  forma- 
tion varies  in  thickness  from  a  few  inches  to  several  feet.  In  the  belt 
just  along  the  coast,  Pleistocene  fossils  have  been  found. 

FLORIDA. 

The  greater  part  of  Florida  is  covered  superficially  with  a  thin 
capping  of  white  sand,  just  beneath  which  is  yellow  sand.  The  age 
of  these  sands  has  not  yet  been  fully  determined.  Florida  is  unusu- 
ally rich  in  marine  Pleistocene  deposits.  To  use  the  words  of  Ball 
and  Harris  concerning  these  marine  deposits  :  "There  are  multitudes 
of  such  localities  where  these  beds  are  visible,  mostly  at  elevations 
not  very  far  from  present  water-level,  and  indicating  a  small  elevation, 
with  possibly  a  smaller  subsequent  depression,  since  they  were  de- 
posited on  the  western  side  of  the  peninsula ;  while  on  the  east  there 
has  been  a  slow,  somewhat  intermittent  elevation,  which  has  amounted 
in  the  total  to  not  less  than  twenty  feet  above  the  present  sea  level  in 
the  cases  where  it  is  lowest,  and  possibly  as  much  more  in  some  local- 
ities. Without  definite  proof  of  the  fact,  it  seems  as  if  there  had  been 
a  tilting  of  the  peninsula  on  its  north  and  south  axis  in  Pleistocene 
times."  These  Pleistocene  localities  are  especially  plentiful  along 
the  western  side  of  the  peninsula,  in  one  place  overlying  the  Pliocene 
and  in  another  the  Miocene.  Elsewhere  in  this  paper  may  be  found 
a  list  of  the  Florida  Pleistocene  fossils. 

III.     GEOGRAPHIC     AND     STRATIGRAPHIC     RELA- 
TIONS OF  THE  PLEISTOCENE  IN  SOUTH 
CAROLINA. 

The  order  of  formations  in  the  Coastal  Plain  of  South  Carolina  is, 
as  can  be  best  determined,  as  follows : 

Columbia Pleistocene 

Lafayette Pliocene 

Miocene . Miocene 

Eocene Eocene 

Marine  Cretaceous Cretaceous 

Potomac Cretaceous 

The  Potomac  outcrops  just  along  the  western  border  of  the  Coastal 


30 

Plain  in  a  belt  four  or  five  miles  wide,  sometimes  swelling  to  a 
width  of  ten  miles,  extending  from  Augusta  through  Aiken,  south  of 
Lexington,  through  Columbia  and  on  into  North  Carolina,  through 
Camden  and  Cheraw.  The  lower  strata  of  the  formation  differ 
markedly  from  the  upper;  they  consist  of  coarse  sands  mainly  with 
pebbles,  sometimes  consolidated  to  a  soft  sandstone  toward  the  south. 
The  upper  beds  are  composed  of  finer  sands  and  clays  in  the  main. 
However,  there  seems  to  be  an  intergrading  of  these  two  series  of 
strata,  clays  occurring  in  the  lower  and  cross-bedded  standstones 
in  the  upper  in  places.  The  Potomac,  outcropping  here  and  over- 
lying the  Piedmont  crystallines,  extends  on  out  beneath  the  later 
formations,  and  has  been  reached  and  bored  through  or  into,  in 
boring  artesian  wells  at  Florence,  Darlington,  Marion,  Charleston 
and  other  places.  The  beds  in  these  places  show  a  combined  thick- 
ness of  400  feet  or  more.  Its  slope  toward  the  sea  is  greater  than 
the  surface  slope  today.  It  is  highly  probable  that  there  is  a  marine 
phase  of  the  Potomac  into  which  the  true  Potomac,  as  just  described, 
intergrades.  But  the  fossils  reported  by  Tourney,  as  occurring  in 
these  beds  at  the  outcrop,  are  perhaps  nothing  more  than  the  im- 
pressions of  mica  plates  so  curved  as  to  appear  very  much  like  the 
impressions  of  shells  or  rather  fragments  of  shells. 

The  Marine  Cretaceous  unconformably  overlies  the  Potomac  in 
the  northeastern  part  of  the  State.  The  materials  are  marls,  sands, 
and  clays  with  characteristic  fossils.  The  formation  seems  to  thin 
out  before  reaching  the  Santee  and  Wateree  toward  the  south,  and 
is  in  most  places  overlaid  by  some  one  of  the  Tertiary  formations. 
Along  the  Waccamaw,  it  is  plainly  exposed  in  many  places  and  is 
overlaid  by  the  Pliocene.  On  the  Peedee  and  some  of  its  tributaries 
the  Cretaceous  is  also  exposed,  and  in  some  places  overlaid  by  the 
Pliocene  and  in  others  by  the  Miocene.  There  is  probably  an  ex- 
posure or  two  on  Black  River,  a  few  miles  below  Kingstree.  The 
formation,  which  is  near  the  surface  in  Horry,  Marion,  Darlington, 
Florence,  Williamsburg,  and  Georgetown  counties,  after  seeming  to 
pinch  out  just  east  of  the  Wateree-Santee  line,  thickens  enormously 
toward  the  south,  so  that  at  Charleston  it  occupies  the  greater  part 
of  the  depth  between  450  and  1,950  feet  in  the  artesian  wells.  But 
some  of  this  thickness  at  Charleston  and  in  the  southern  part  of  the 
State  may  be  the  marine  phase  of  the  Potomac.  The  distinction  the 
writer  would  make  between  marine  Cretaceous  and  the  marine 
phase  of  the  Potomac  is  simply  one  in  point  of  time  of  deposition — 
the  marine  Cretaceous  being  put  down  upon  the  Potomac  after  an 


erosion  interval,  the  marine  phase  of  the  Potomac  being  put  down 
at  the  same  time  with  the  true  Potomac.  To  just  which  one  of  these 
two  formations  the  beds  at  Charleston  belong,  is  a  question  which  is 
not  yet  fully  determined.  Darton  seems  to  consider  the  greater  part 
of  this  thickness  as  belonging  to  the  marine  phase  of  the  Potomac; 
but  the  fossils  from  it  have  an  appearance  very  similar  to  that  of  the 
fossils  of  the  marine  Cretaceous  of  New  Jersey,  and  the  probability 
is  strong  that  these  beds  at  Charleston,  to  a  considerable  depth,  are 
marine  Cretaceous  resting  upon  the  Potomac. 

South  and  west  of  the  Santee,  the  Potomac  is  overlaid  by  the 
Eocene,  which  also  extends  northward  overlying  the  marine  Cre- 
taceous and  becoming  thinner  and  thinner  as  it  stretches  northward 
until  it  exists  only  in  widely  scattered  patches  on  the  irregular  sur- 
face of  the  Cretaceous  marl  and  gives  out  altogether  before  reaching 
the  Waccamaw.  At  Charleston  and  thereabout,  the  Eocene  rests 
upon  the  marine  Cretaceous.  In  the  western  part  of  the  Eocene 
formation  in  the  State,  where  it  outcrops  along  the  line  from  Aiken 
to  within  a  few  miles  of  Columbia,  the  lowest  beds  are  composed  of 
buhrstone  and  argillaceous  beds.  This  Buhrstone  formation,  accord- 
ing to  Darton,1  appears  to  lose  its  characteristics  in  the  extreme 
eastern  part  of  the  State  and  becomes  a  marl.  According  to  the 
same  writer,  the  thickness  of  the  Eocene  members  at  Charleston  is 
about  370  feet,  and  are  supposed  to  extend  upward  to  about  60  feet 
from  the  surface.  Now,  elsewhere  in  this  chapter,  it  is  pointed  out 
that  the  Pliocene  has  been  reported  from  a  depth  of  65  feet  at 
Charleston.  If  this  latter  statement  be  true,  then  the  Eocene  must 
be  somewhat  farther  down  still — maybe  very  little  farther.  Besides 
the  Buhrstone  the  Eocene  beds  consist  of  marls  of  various  kinds, 
which  have  been  put  into  two  classes  by  Tourney  and  others — viz.,  the 
Santee  beds,  which  are  light  colored,  and  the  Ashley  and  Cooper 
beds,  which  are  darker  in  color. 

What  small,  thin  patches  of  Miocene  have  been  left  after  erosion 
are  in  the  northeastern  part  of  the  State,  in  Florence,  Sumter,  Dar- 
lington and  Marion  counties.  It  occupies  depressions  in  either  the 
Eocene  or  the  marine  Cretaceous.  The  beds  are  rarely  more  than 
thirty  feet  in  thickness,  and  are  generally  much  thinner.  They  con- 
sist of  sands  and  marls  and  contain  many  species  of  molluscan  fos- 
sils. Other  small  areas  of  it  have  been  found  in  the  southern  part 


1  "Notes  on  the  Relations  of  Lower  Members  of  the  Coastal  Plain  Series  in 
South  Carolina"  (Geol.  Soc.  Amer.,  Bull.,  Vol.  VII,  pp.  512-18,  1896). 


32 

of  the  State,  notably  on  Goose  Creek  and  on  the  Ashley.  The  geo- 
graphical situation  of  these  remnants  of  beds  indicates  that  the 
Miocene  formation  was  deposited  continuously  over  the  lower  part 
of  the  Coastal  Plain  area  of  the  State,  but  has  been  so  extensively 
eroded  as  to  leave  only  these  fragments  here  and  there. 

The  Pliocene  in  South  Carolina  may  be  looked  upon  as  divided  into 
a  fossiliferous  and  a  non-fossiliferous  member.  The  latter  is  called 
Lafayette,  but  may  prove  to  be  of  the  same  age  as  the  fossiliferous 
Pliocene.  The  fossiliferous  beds  are  well  cut  into  by  the  Waccamaw 
River,  and  afford  many  species  of  fossils,  and  are  seen  to  contain  an 
occasional  nodule  of  phosphatic  material.  The  presence  here  of  phos- 
phate in  well-determined  Pliocene  deposits,  together  with  the  fact 
that  the  Pliocene  beds  of  Florida  are  highly  phosphorated,  lead  us 
also  to  consider  the  phosphate  beds  in  the  region  about  Charleston 
to  be  either  Pliocene  in  age  or  else  to  have  been  phosphorated  during 
this  period.  These  facts,  combined  with  the  occurrence  of  Pliocene 
fossils  from  a  depth  of  sixty-five  feet  in  the  artesian  wells  of  Charles- 
ton, indicate  that  the  fossiliferous  Pliocene  may  underlie  the  surface 
formation  of  a  large  part  of  the  coast  of  the  State.  The  color  of  the 
sand  and  clay  in  which  the  fossils  on  the  Waccamaw  are  embedded, 
is  yellow  and  in  marked  contrast  to  the  gray  sands  above.  This  fur- 
nishes a  connecting  link  between  the  fossiliferous  Pliocene  and  the 
Lafayette  farther  inland,  which  is  everywhere  seen  to  consist  of 
"orange-colored"  sands  and  clays.  Future  detailed  work  may  reveal 
an  intergrading  of  the  two  members.  It  at  any  rate  seems  perfectly 
safe,  from  its  occurrence  elsewhere,  to  regard  the  Lafayette  as  Plio- 
cene. According  to  McGee1,  the  Lafayette  formation  extends  across 
the  State  in  a  broad  belt  at  an  elevation  varying  from  25  to  650  feet 
above  tide  level.  In  the  western  part  of  its  extent  the  Lafayette, rests 
unconformably  upon  the  Piedmont  crystallines  in  some  instances, 
and  again  upon  the  Potomac.  Toward  the  east  it  rests  unconforma- 
bly upon  the  Miocene,  Eocene  or  Marine  Cretaceous.  It  varies  in 
thickness  from  thirty  to  eighty  feet.  Though  "orange  colored"  for 
the  most  part,  yet  there  are  marked  variations  in  the  color  of  the 
sands,  clays  and  loams  which  compose  the  formation.  Sometimes 
the  color  is  a  chocolate  brown,  at  other  times  a  brighter  red  than  the 
usual  orange.  The  Pliocene  is  everywhere,  except,  perhaps,  on  its 
western  margin,  unconformably  overlaid  by  the  Pleistocene;  or, 
differently  expressed,  the  Lafayette  is  everywhere  unconformably 


1  "Three  Formations  of  the  Middle  Atlantic  Slope"    (Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  3d 
ser.,  Vol.  XL,  1800). 


33 

overlaid  by  the  Columbia.  Where  erosion  has  carried  away  the  gray 
or  whitish-colored  Columbia  sands  and  the  alternating  orange-colored 
sands  are  exposed,  the  difference  is  quite  marked  and  the  contrast 
rather  pleasing  than  otherwise. 

The  fossiliferous  Pleistocene,  as  stated  elsewhere  in  this  paper,  is 
exposed  in  numerous  places  along  the  entire  coast  line  of  the  State, 
where  streams  have  cut  down  and  carried  away  the  overlying  mate- 
rial Nowhere  do  these  exposures  occur  farther  inland  than  ten 
miles  from  the  present  shore  line.  Everywhere  the  bed  is  not  far 
above  or  far  below  tide  level,  though  at  one  place,  Laurel  Bluff,  it 
occurs,  according  to  Tuomey,  at  an  elevation  of  eight  feet  above  tide, 
and  at  Charleston  it  lies  several  feet  below  tide.  The  following  de- 
scriptions of  localities,  together  with  sections  where  they  could  be 
obtained,  will  serve  to  show  this.  In  making  these  descriptions,  re- 
course is  had  to  the  literature  on  the  subject,  especially  where  the 
country  has  been  so  changed  by  the  forces  of  nature  and  by  man's 
activities — in  phosphate  mining  and  otherwise — as  to  almost,  if  not 
quite,  destroy  these  beds  of  shells  once  so  well  exposed. 

I.  Price's  Creek  (White  Point  Creek),  Horry  County. 

The  exposure  here  seems  to  have  been  a  bed  of  loose  sand  and 
shells,  not  deeply  covered  by  overlying  sands,  as  is  the  case  in  many 
other  localities.  The  bed  was  about  six  feet  thick  and  was  elevated 
above  tide  about  five  feet.  Among  the  shells  found  were  Venus  mer- 
cenaries, Ostrea  Virginica,  Scapharca  incongrua,  Area  Noae  and  a 
species  of  Pectunculus. 

[I  use  the  past  tense  here  because  of  the  fact  that  this  bed  could 
not  be  located  last  summer,  as  explained  in  the  introduction  to  this 
paper.] 

II.  Laurel,  Georgetown  County,  northeastern  corner. 

A  section  here  of  the  perpendicular  bluff  of  the  Waccamaw  gives : 

Yellowish,  light-colored  sand 20  feet 

Blue  mud 6  inches  to  I  foot 

Fossiliferous  bed,  sand  and  broken  shells,  contain- 
ing Area,  Mactra,  Rangia,  etc 8  feet 

The  top  of  the  bed  is  eight  feet  above  tide.  This  is  possibly  a 
Pliocene  bed,  as  some  have  claimed ;  but  the  fact  that  all  the  fossils 
listed  from  it  have  been  found  elsewhere  in  the  Pleistocene,  and  also 
especially  that  Donax  variabilis,  one  of  the  species  found,  has  not 
been  found  as  yet  earlier  than  the  Pleistocene,  justifies  one  in  consid- 
ering the  bed  Pleistocene  rather  than  Pliocene. 

3— P.  D. 


34 

III.  Winyah  Canal,  Georgetown  County,  southern  part. 

Here,  in  excavating  the  canal  connecting  Winyah  Bay  with  the 
north  run  of  the  Santee,  Pleistocene  fossils  were  exposed.  This  in- 
dicates that  the  whole  country  thereabouts  is  underlaid  at  a  slight 
depth  beneath  the  surface  by  this  formation. 

IV.  Wambraw  Creek  (?),  Charleston  County,  northern  part. 

To  quote  directly  from  Tuomey :  "In  Christ  Church  Parish, 
Charleston  District,  there  are  several  exposures  where  this  bed  comes 
so  near  the  surface  as  to  be  within  reach  of  the  plough.  The  marl 
is  sufficiently  calcareous  as  to  be  of  great  economic  value.  In  one  in- 
stance I  found  a  bed  of  calcareous  mud,  such  as  is  formed  by  the  dis- 
integration of  corals."  As  well  as  can  be  learned,  this  locality  is  on 
Wambraw  Creek,  or  not  far  from  it. 

V.  Goose  Creek,  north  of  Charleston. 
The  section  here,  according  to  Holmes,  is : 

Yellow  sand 12  feet 

Blue  mud 2  feet 

Ferruginous  sand,  containing  bones,  etc 3  inches 

Yellow  sand 3  feet 

Pliocene  marl,  resting  on  Eocene  white  marl 12  feet 

The  fossil  bones  are  in  a  good  state  of  preservation,  especially  in 
the  blue  mud.  More  will  be  said  of  these  deposits  of  vertebrate  fos- 
sils in  describing  the  next  locality. 

VI.  Ashley  River. 

This  locality,  famous  for  the  beds  of  vertebrate  fossils  which 
Holmes,  after  a  careful  study  for  a  number  of  years,  considered 
Pleistocene,  and  which  are  still  considered  Pleistocene  by  most  geol- 
ogists, furnishes  about  thirty-five  or  forty  species  of  vetebrate  fos- 
sils. A  section  here  gives  something  like  this : 

Yellow  sands  with  bands  of  clay 4  feet 

Blue  mud  just  above  the  Miocene  marls I  foot  to  more. 

In  some  places  there  is  a  varying  thickness  of  sand  or  of  sand  and 
clay  between  the  blue  mud  and  the  Miocene  marls.  The  fossil  bones 
which  are  found  in  these  strata  are  often  in  a  good  state  of  preserva- 
tion, especially  those  in  the  blue  mud.  This  locality  and  that  on 
Goose  Creek  were  especially  interesting  to  the  geologists  of  thirty- 
five  or  forty  years  ago,  when  numerous  vertebrate  fossils  could  be 
picked  up;  but  now  that  they  have  been  despoiled  in  working  the 
phosphate  deposits,  they  have  lost  some  of  the  interest  that  they  once 


35 

had.    These  sections  have  been  given  more  as  a  matter  of  historic 
interest  than  anything  else. 

VII.  Bee's  Ferry,  Ashley  River. 
Here  a  section  shows: 

Fine,  loose  sands 15  to  20  feet 

Fossiliferous  bed,  sands  and  shells,  well  preserved 3  feet 

Fine  laminated  clay,  resting  on  blue  mud  with  layers  of 

sand  between  laminea,  containing  Mactra 6  inches 

The  top  of  the  fossiliferous  strata  is  about  at  high-water  mark. 
This  exposure  is  about  200  yards  long,  and  from  it  Tuomey  collected 
twenty-six  species  common  to  the  Pleistocene  elsewhere  in  the  State. 

VIII.  Charleston. 

A  section  from  the  wells  in  the  city  shows  the  following  order  of 
strata : 

Loose  sand,  below  which  water  is  found 5  to  6  feet 

Quick  sand  and  clay,  with  occasional  remains  of  trees ...  9  feet 

Sand  and  small  shells I  foot 

Gravel  and  oyster  shells 2  feet 

Fine,  close  clay  and  young  oyster  shells 3  feet 

Fluff  clay,  with  scales  of  mica 20  feet 

Continuing  this  from  the  report  of  the  special  committee  on  the 

artesian  well,  Charleston,  we  have,  after  a  break : 

Pliocene  deposit  with  Tellina,  Area,  etc from   65  to     100  feet 

Tertiary,  Venus,  Tellina,  phosphate  nodules. .  .from    80 to     100  feet 

Tertiary,  phosphate  nodules,  oyster  shell  brec- 
cia  from  350  to    430  feet 

Cretaceous  fossils,  varying  with  depth from  600  to  1,955  feet 

IX.  Stono  River. 

The  section  here,  according  to  Dr.  Glenn,  is  : 

Sands,  mostly  loose,  light-colored  near  surface  from  veg- 
etable matter,  but  in  middle  and  lower  parts  varying 
from  light  cream  color  to  red 8  to  14  feet 

Pleistocene  fossils  in  white  or  light  gray  sand  with  little 

mud  and  with  some  loose  nodules  of  phosphate  rock . .  3  to  4  feet 

Nodular  phosphate  rock  overlying  Tertiary  marls.  Shells 
well  preserved  in  the  beds,  which  were  being  removed 
to  get  at  the  phosphate  rock  beneath o  to  4  feet 

i 


36 

X.  Young  Island,  Wadmalaw  Sound. 

A  section  of  the  bluff  in  the  lower  part  of  which  lies  the  fossil 
bed  is : 

Loose,  yellowish,  light-colored  sands loto  15  feet 

Ferruginous  sand  with  casts  of  shells,  breaking  in  fairly 

good  lumps 2  feet 

Red  or  brownish  clay 2  feet 

Fossiliferous  bed,  sand  of  grayish  color  with  little  mud, 

with  comminuted  shells,  fossils  in  fine  preservation .  .   3  to   4  feet 

The  part  of  the  bluff  above  the  fossil-bearing  stratum  is  almost 
perpendicular,  but  the  fossil  bed  slopes  gently  beneath  the  tide.  The 
tide  rises  to  the  level  of  the  top  of  the  bed  of  fossils.  If  observations 
or  collections  are  to  be  made,  they  must  be  made  when  the  tide  is 
low.  Many  of  the  shells  here,  such  as  Barnea  costata  and  Labiosa 
canaliculata,  are  found  in  pretty  much  the  same  position  they  occu- 
pied in  life,  having  both  valves  entire  and  in  correct  position.  The 
shells  are  remarkably  well  preserved,  having  a  bright,  fresh  appear- 
ance, oftentimes  retaining  the  polish  and  color  they  had  the  day  they 
were  deposited. 

XL  Doctor's  Swamp. 

Here  the  fossil  bed,  which  is  of  the  usual  thickness,  three  or  four 
feet,  is  overlaid  by  a  kind  of  marshy  soil  surcapped  by  sand.  The 
extent  of  the  exposure  is  considerable,  being  perhaps  five  miles  in 
length. 

XII.  Lady's  Island  and  other  points  around  Beaufort. 

A  section  in  that  neighborhood,  which  is  roughly  characteristic  of 
the  fossiliferous  Pleistocene  in  that  whole  region,  is  about  as  fol- 
lows, according  to  Ruffin : 

* 

Loose  beach  sand 8  to  10  feet  to  more 

Marl  similar  to  the  common  blue  Miocene  marl 

of  Virginia,  but  containing  Pleistocene  fossils .   3  to   4  feet. 

The  fossiliferous  Pleistocene,  as  is  seen  from  the  situation  of  the 
localities  just  described,  extends  along  the  coast  of  the  State  from 
northern  Horry  to  southern  Beaufort.  It  is  composed  here  of  sand, 
clay  and  mud,  with  by  far  the  greater  percentage  of  sand  in  most 
localities  where  examined.  The  fossil-bearing  strata  themselves  are 
rarely  ever  more  than  four  feet  in  thickness,  though  the  whole  Pleis- 
tocene formation  may,  in  many  places  along  the  coast,  be  forty  or 
fifty  to  sixty  feet  in  thickness. 


B  ft  A 

or  THE 
UNIVERSITY 

y  37 

- 


\ 

ITY  I 


In  Horry  and  Georgetown  counties,  it  overlies  the  Pliocene,  as  has 
been  fully  determined ;  and  if  the  report  of  the  Special  Committee  on 
the  artesian  well  at  Charleston  is  to  be  relied  upon,  the  Pliocene  also 
underlies  the  Pleistocene  there.  From  a  depth  of  sixty-five  feet  were 
reported  shells  of  the  Pliocene  Age.  It  is  well  known  that,  following 
the  Pliocene  submergence  and  deposition,  there  was  a  period  ol  ele- 
vation and  extensive  erosion.  Now,  it  is  altogether  possible,  entirely 
probable,  that  the  Pliocene  was  entirely  eroded  and  carried  away  in 
places,  but  it  is  hardly  probable  that  it  would  be  altogether  removed 
from  so  extensive  a  stretch  of  country  as  that  from  southern  George- 
town to  the  Georgia  line,  as  some  have  supposed,  as  may  be  assumed 
from  the  statement  made :  "They  [the  Pleistocene  strata]  rest  in 
Horry  and  Georgetown  on  the  Pliocene  and  for  the  remainder  of  the 
coast  on  the  Eocene."  In  many  places,  no  doubt,  and  over  extensive 
areas,  they  do  rest  upon  the  Eocene;  but  the  fact,  if  it  be  a  fact,  that 
the  Pliocene  exists  at  a  depth  beneath  Charleston  that  corresponds  to 
the  thickness  of  the  Pleistocene  is  an  indication  that  the  Pliocene  un- 
derlies the  Pleistocene  not  only  in  Horry  and  Georgetown,  but  all 
along  the  coast  where  it  has  not  been  entirely  removed  by  erosion. 
For  if  the  Pliocene  exists  beneath  Charleston,  as  has  been  determined 
by  materials  brought  up  from  wells  where  a  record  has  been  kept,  in 
all  probability  it  also  underlies  the  Pleistocene  in  many  other  locali- 
ties. This  supposition,  and  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  it  can  be  no 
more  than  a  supposition,  can  be  held  to  until  records  from  wells 
either  confirm  or  contradict  it.  The  likelihood  is  that  it  will  be  con- 
firmed ;  for  we  have  some  additional  proof  that  there  are  remnants  of 
other  formations  between  the  Eocene  and  the  Pleistocene  from  Dr. 
Ball's  examination  of  some  fossils  found  in  the  "land  phosphate"  of 
Ashley  River,  thought  to  belong  to  the  Eocene  by  Holmes  and  others. 
Dall  has  decided,  after  carefully  examining  the  fossils  found  in  lumps 
of  the  "land  phosphate"  which  were  picked  up  on  Block  Island  from 
the  wrecked  cargo  of  a  vessel  laden  with  that  commodity,  that  these 
phosphatized  nodules  are  not  of  Eocene  Age,  as  generally  supposed, 
but  of  Miocene  Age,  nearly  related  to  the  Chesapeake  Miocene.  He 
found  about  twenty  species  of  fossils  in  these  nodules  of  phosphate 
picked  up  at  Block  Island,  not  one  of  which  was  found  to  be  Eocene, 
but  all  were  well-known  later  or  upper  Miocene  shells.  Hence  his 
conclusion  that  the  phosphatized  nodules  were  of  a  later  formation 
than  the  Eocene ;  indeed,  of  the  upper  Miocene,  corresponding  to  the 
Chesapeake  Miocene,  as  has  just  been  mentioned.  He  adds  that  the 
phosphatizing  took  place  after  the  formation  of  the  beds,  possibly  in 


38 

Pliocene  times,  as 'is  the  case  of  the  phosphate  beds  of  Peace  River, 
Florida.  Again  Holmes,  in  his  description  of  the  Goose  Creek  local- 
ity, makes  the  assertion  that  the  Pleistocene  rests  upon  the  Pliocene, 
which  in  turn  rests  upon  the  Eocene.  This,  so  far  as  is  known  to 
the  writer,  has  not  been  shown  to  be  false.  All  in  all,  then,  there 
seems  to  be  sufficient  evidence  to  warrant  the  statement  that  between 
the  Pleistocene  and  Eocene  south  of  Georgetown,  all  along  the  coast, 
there  are  intervening  beds  of  Pliocene  or  Miocene,  where  these  lat- 
ter beds  have  not  been  carried  away  altogether  by  erosion,  which  has 
doubtless  been  the  case  over  considerable  areas  here  and  there,  where 
stream,  wave,  current  or  tide  activity  has  been  especially  vigorous. 
This  is  about  what  should  be  expected  under  normal  conditions. 

The  non-fossiliferous  portion  of  the  Pleistocene  (and  the  writer 
considers  this  the  same  as  the  Columbia  of  McGee),  which  includes 
by  far  the  greater  amount  of  the  surficial  formation  of  the  Coastal 
Plain  of  the  State,  grades  everywhere  so  gradually  and  uninterrupt- 
edly into  the  fossiliferous,  both  in  kind  and  arrangement  of  materials, 
except  the  fossils  of  course,  that  it  is  impossible  to  draw  any  distinct 
line  between  the  two.  This  has  usually  been  called  Columbia  from 
its  typical  development  in  the  District  of  Columbia.  It  has  not  been 
found  capable  of  subdivision  into  fluvial  and  interfluvial  members 
here,  as  has  been  the  case  in  Virginia  and  farther  North.  Neither 
does  there  exist  a  basis  for  such  a  division  as  that  in  Maryland  into 
Sunderland,  Wicomico  and  Talbot,  nor  as  that  in  New  Jersey  into 
Bridgeton,  Pensauken  and  Cape  May.  In  New  Jersey  these  divisions 
respectfully  represent  early,  middle  and  late  Pleistocene ;  so  likewise 
do  the  divisions  in  Maryland  represent  the  earlier  and  later  Pleisto- 
cene— the  Sunderland  and  Wicomico  being  considered  two  divisions 
of  the  earlier  Columbia  (or  Pleistocene),  and  the  Talbot  the  later. 
Doubtless  if  there  were  two  or  more  distinct  submergences  during 
Pleistocene  times  in  New  Jersey  and  Maryland,  there  were  also  in 
South  Carolina;  but  here  there  are  no  terraced  rivers  or  shore  lines 
to  show  this,  and  the  sands  and  other  materials  are  so  nearly  alike 
as  to  be  indistinguishable.  It  may  be  that  the  Talbot  in  Maryland 
corresponds  to  the  fossiliferous  portion  of  the  Pleistocene  in  South 
Carolina,  since  to  it  (the  Talbot)  have  been  attributed  the  fossilifer- 
ous beds  at  Cornfield  Harbor  and  Wailes'  Bluff.  The  supposition  is 
that  the  successive  Pleistocene  submergences  in  South  Carolina, 
though  on  the  whole  less  marked  than  those  farther  north,  yet  had 
their  relative  depths  somewhat  reversed.  That  which  took  place  in 
Virginia,  the  advance  of  the  interfluvial  over  the  fluvial  phase,  may 


39  <* 

have  been  so  intensified  here  as  to  bring  about  a  complete  overlapping 
and  obscuring  of  the  fluvial  by  the  interfluvial,  or  of  the  "high  level" 
by  the  "low  level,"  as  denoted  in  Maryland.  The  sands  are  for  the 
most  part  loose,  unconsolidated  and  to  distinguish  between  succes- 
sive depositions,  without  the  aid  of  such  phenomena  as  terraces  or 
bowlders  and  other  things  which  help  in  the  interpreting  of  condi- 
tions farther  north,  is  almost  an  impossibility  at  the  present  stage  of 
investigation  into  the  problem. 

As  to  the  areal  distribution  of  the  Pleistocene  in  the  State,  it  may 
in  a  word  be  said  to  be  the  surficial  formation  over  the  entire  Coastal 
Plain  of  the  State.  According  to  J.  A.  Holmes1,  the  Coastal  Plain 
region  of  the  State  is  covered  almost  everywhere  with  a  mantle  of 
loose  material — loam,  clay  and  sand,  the  latter  predominating.  This 
covering  of  sand,  extending  from  the  shore  back  to  the  inner  margin 
of  the  Coastal  Plain  and  in  places  overlapping  on  the  crystalline  rocks 
of  the  Piedmont  Plateau,  attains  an  elevation  of  400  to  600  feet,  and 
belongs  either  to  the  Lafayette  or  to  the  Columbia  formation.  After 
briefly  describing  the  occurrences  of  the  Cretaceous,  the  Eocene  and 
the  Lafayette,  Holmes  says  of  the  Columbia :  "Spread  out  over  this 
deeply  and  irregularly  eroded  surface,  resting  in  places  on  the 
Lafayette  or  the  Eocene  or  the  Cretaceous,  or  where  all  these  have 
been  removed,  even  on  the  crystalline  rocks,  lies  the  mantle  of  sand 
and  loam  known  as  Columbia."  He  further  says :  The  topography 
of  this  inner  margin  of  the  Coastal  Plain  is  as  old  as  the  post-Creta- 
ceous and  post-Eocene  erosion  intervals.  The  valleys  and  stream 
channels  formed  then  were  nearly  filled  during  the  Lafayette  deposi- 
tion, but  were  opened  up  again  practically  along  the  same  lines  dur- 
ing the  post-Lafayette  erosion  period.  The  Columbia  deposition 
mantled  these  hills  and  valleys  with  a  slight  covering  only,  and 
erosion  since  that  time  has  made  but  little  change  in  the  general 
topography  of  the  country  in  this  marginal  section  of  the  Coastal 
Plain.  Farther  toward  the  sea  the  sand  becomes  finer  and  has  more 
loam  intermixed  with  it.  Just  along  the  present  shore  line  and  back  a 
short  distance  the  Pleistocene  is  overlaid  by  the  Recent  sands,  which 
are  coarser.  It  may  be  well  to  add  that  the  very  slight  deposition 
formed  during  the  Pleistocene  submergence  has  been  in  places  eroded 
from  the  hills  and  has  left  the  orange-colored  sands  of  the  Lafayette 
exposed.  This  intermixture  of  the  two  formations  has  given  the 
"sand  hills"  and  "red  hills"  of  the  State.  In  studying  the  Pleistocene 


1  "Geology  of  the  Sandhill  Country  of  the  Carolinas"   (Geol.  Soc.  Amer, 
Bull.,  Vol.  V,  pp.  33-35,  1894). 


40 

sands,  one  sees  very  little  or  no  difference  in  the  material  along  the 
streams  and  that  on  the  divides  between  the  streams.  Furthermore, 
there  are  no  pebbles  of  such  size  as  to  warrant  the  name  "bowlder." 
The  largest  water-worn  fragments  are  less  than  a  foot  in  diameter. 
This,  together  with  the  fact  noted  by  Shaler1,  that  the  creeks  along 
the  Coastal  margin  are  more  often  parallel  with  the  coast  line 
than  perpendicular  to  it,  and,  therefore,  could  not  have  been  the 
result  of  glacier  scourings  as  in  Maine,  justify  the  assertion  that 
glacial  influence  did  not  extend  in  any  marked  degree  so  far  south 
as  to  South  Carolina;  indeed,  it  may  be  said  that  glacial  influence 
here  was  almost  if  not  quite  imperceptible. 

IV.    TABLES    OF    SOUTH   CAROLINA  PLEISTOCENE 
FOSSILS,  WITH   DATA  TO  ATTEMPT  AN   INTER- 
PRETATION  OF  ENVIRONMENTAL  CONDI- 
TIONS UNDER  WHICH  SUCH 
FOSSILS  LIVED. 

i.  EXPLANATION  OF  TABLES. 

These  tables  have  been  made  to  include,  as  nearly  as  possible,  all 
Pleistocene  molluscan  fossils  from  South  Carolina.  Not  much  atten- 
tion has  been  paid  to  vertebrate  fossils  of  this  age  in  the  State,  though 
such  have  been  found  on  Ashley  River  in  great  abundance  and 
elsewhere  in  some  quantity.  This  is  perhaps  the  largest  list  of  Pleis- 
tocene mollusca  that  has  up  to  this  time  been  published  from  the 
State,  including  about  180  species,  and  representing  about  no 
genera  or  genera  and  subgenera  combined.  Much  time  and  labor  has 
been  spent  in  ascertaining  the  various  facts  regarding  each  species ; 
and,  however  far  astray  the  writer  may  go  in  drawing  conclusions 
from  his  tables,  he  feels  confident  that  the  tables  represent  the  facts 
in  the  case  so  far  as  they  can  at  present  be  ascertained. 

In  regard  to  the  tables,  first,  after  the  name  of  the  species  comes 
the  column  to  show  whether  or  not  it  is  in  our  own  Vanderbilt  Uni- 
versity Collection ;  if  it  is  the  letter  V  is  found  opposite  its  name. 
Next  are  the  columns  to  show  the  localities  in  the  State  where  each 
species  has  been  found.  Young  Island  (Simmons  Bluff  in  the  litera- 
ture) is  the  most  noted  locality,  though  the  Stono  River  beds  afford 
almost  as  many  species.  The  localities  have  been  arranged  in  accord- 


1"On  the  Phosphate  Beds  of  South  Carolina"  (U.  S.  Coast  Surv.,  Report 
for  1870,  pp.  182-89,  Washington,  1870). 


ance  with  the  number  of  species  found,  as  nearly  as  may  he.  The 
fossils  listed  from  Charleston  come  mainly  from  the  artesian-well 
borings.  The  last  column  of  this  series  contains  space  for  the  listing 
of  fossils  from  localities  where  only  a  few  species  have  been  found, 
and  is  headed  simply  "Other  Places."  After  this  are  columns  to 
show  whether  or  not  the  different  species  lived  in  other  geologic  ages 
preceding  the  Pleistocene  and  what  ages,  also  whether  or  not  they 
are  still  living.  In  this  last  particular  a  blank  opposite  a  name  does 
not  necessarily  mean  that  the  species  is  extinct ;  it  means  simply  that, 
so  far  as  known,  the  species  is  not  still  living.  In  these  columns  and 
in  the  preceding  the  cross  mark  (X)  indicates  that  the  species  is 
found  in  that  locality  or  in  that  age.  In  the  first  column  for  geologic 
ages,  "Pre-Miocene,"  the  following  initial  letters  are  used:  E  for 
Eocene ;  O  for  Oligocene ;  C  for  Cretaceous.  Then  comes  a  column 
to  show  the  relative  abundance  or  scarcity  of  each  species  as  a  Pleis- 
tocene fossil,  so  far  as  this  has  been  learned.  In  this  column  the 
following  initial  letters  are  employed:  VR  for  very  rare;  R  for 
rare ;  U  for  uncommon ;  NU  for  not  uncommon ;  C  for  common ; 
FA  for  fairly  abundant;  A  for  abundant;  VA  for  very  abundant. 
These  terms  are  intended  to  show  a  gradual  rise  in  point  of  numbers 
from  very  rare,  where  only  one  or  two  or  three  individuals  of  the 
species  have  been  found  in  a  considerable  amount  of  material  gath- 
ered from  any  one  locality,  on  up  to  very  abundant,  where  almost  a 
sixth  or  fifth,  sometimes  more,  of  the  material  may  be  of  a  single 
species. 

Then  are  given,  in  appropriate  columns,  items  concerning  the  en- 
vironmental conditions  of  such  Pleistocene  species  as  are  still  living. 
First,  a  column  giving  the  depth  range;  in  this,  following  Dall  in 
Bulletin  No.  57  of  the  United  States  National  Museum,  when  no 
figures  are  given,  it  is  usually  to  be  understood  that  the  depth  is 
shallow.  The  figures  are  given  in  fathoms,  and  written  with  the  less 
depth  first ;  then  a  dash  (-),  and  the  greater  depth ;  for  example,  3-24, 
means  ranging  in  depth  from  3  fathoms  to  24  fathoms.  These  depth 
ranges  cannot  be  relied  upon  without  reserve  for  any  one  particular 
beach  or  limited  locality,  for  they  apply  to  each  species  throughout 
its  entire  geographical  range.  As  is  well  known,  a  species  living  in 
Massachusetts  Bay,  say,  at  a  depth  of  6-8  fathoms  would,  on  migrat- 
ing southward,  seek  ever-increasing  depths  in  order  to  find  waters  as 
cold  as  it  had  been  accustomed  to.  In  the  second  column  is  given 
the  kind  of  shore  or  bottom  which  the  species  prefers,  whether 
muddy,  sandy,  gravelly,  shelly,  rocky  or  what  not.  Where  a  species 


42 

seems  to  live  almost  equally  as  well  on  one  kind  of  shore  or  bottom 
as  on  another,  effort  will  be  made  to  put  its  habitats  in  order  of  pref- 
erence. In  case  the  species  prefers  brackish  water,  this  will  also  be 
recorded  in  this  column.  The  third  and  fourth  columns  of  these  en- 
vironmental items  show  the  extreme  northern  and  extreme  southern 
geographical  ranges  of  the  different  species. 

In  the  tables  there  will  occasionally  be  found  the  name  of  a  species 
and  not  very  much  additional  information  concerning  it,  perhaps  only 
where  it  has  been  found  as  a  fossil.  This  has  come  about  by  taking 
Holmes'  list  to  make  this  list  as  full  as  possible.  Occasionally  a 
species,  mentioned  and  described  by  Holmes,  has  not  been  found  de- 
scribed anywhere  else  in  the  literature  accessible,  and  consequently 
the  columns  are  left  blank  opposite  such  species.  This  is  true  of  five 
of  the  six  species  of  Fusus  that  he  gives ;  true,  also,  of  Columbella  or- 
nata  and  Volva  acicularis.  Just  after  the  main  tables  are  found  lists 
of  Pleistocene  fossils  from  localities  in  other  States.  These  lists 
have  been  placed  here  for  convenience  in  ready  comparison. 

In  addition  to  the  facts  obtained  at  first  hand,  the  following  pub- 
lications were  used  in  making  out  these  tables  : 

"Manuel  de  Conchyliologie  et  de  Paleontologie  Conchy liologique." 
Dr.  Paul  Fisher,  Paris,  1887. 

"Einleitung  in  die  Geologic  als  Historiche  Wissenschaft."  Johannes 
Walther,  Jena,  1893. 

"Geological  Biology."    H.  S.  Williams,  New  York,  1895. 

"Report  upon  the  Invertebrate  Animals  of  Vineyard  Sound  and 
Adjacent  Waters."  A.  E.  Verrill  and  S.  I.  Smith,  Washington,  1874. 

"Report  on  the  Invertebrata  of  Massachusetts."  A.  A.  Gould, 
Edited  by  W.  G.  Binney,  Boston,  1870. 

"Structural  and  Systematic  Conchology."  George  W.  Tryon,  Jr., 
Philadelphia,  1882-1884. 

"A  Preliminary  Catalogue  of  the  Shell-bearing  Marine  Mollusks 
and  Brachiopods  of  the  Southeastern  Coast  of  the  United  States." 
W.  H.  Ball,  Bulletin  No.  37,  U.  S.  Nat.  Museum,  1889. 

"American  Conchology  or  Description  of  the  Shells  of  North 
America."  Thomas  Say,  New  Harmony,  Ind.,  1830. 

Dr.  W.  H.  Dall's  work  in  the  Transactions  of  the  Wagner  Free 
Institute  of  Sciences,  Parts  1-6,  Vol.  Ill,  Philadelphia,  1890-1903. 

Republication  of  Conrad's  "Fossil  Shells  of  the  Medial  Tertiary  of 
the  United  States,"  with  an  Introduction  by  W.  H.  Dall.  Wagner 
Free  Institute  of  Sciences,  1893. 


43 

Republication  of  Conrad's  "Fossil  Shells  of  the  Tertiary  Forma- 
tions of  North  America."  G.  D.  Harris,  Washington,  1893. 

"Three  Cruises  of  the  Blake."    Alexander  Aggassiz,  Boston,  1888. 

"Natural  History  of  New  York,  Part  V,  Mollusca."  J.  E.  DeKay, 
Albany,  1843. 

"Report  of  the  North  Carolina  Geological  Survey."  Ebenezer 
Emmons,  Raleigh,  1858. 

"Report  on  the  Survey  of  South  Carolina."  E.  Ruffin,  Columbia, 
1842. 

"Geological  Survey  of  South  Carolina."  M.  Tuomey,  Columbia, 
1848. 

"Pleistocene  Fossils  of  South  Carolina."  F.  S.  Holmes,  Charles- 
ton, 1860. 

"Post-Pliocene  Deposits  of  Sankoty  Head."  Fred.  J.  H.  Merrill, 
N.  Y.  Acad.  Sci.,  Trans.,  1895-1896. 

"Observations  on  a  Portion  of  the  Atlantic  Tertiary  Region,  etc." 
T.  A.  Conrad,  Nat.  Inst.,  Proc.,  Vol.  I,  pp  171-194,  1842. 

"A  Conchological  Manual."    G.  B.  Sowerby,  Jr.,  London,  1846. 

"Marine  Invertebrata  of  Grand  Monan,  etc."  Wm.  Stimpson, 
Washington,  1853. 

Various  Papers  by  W.  H.  Dall,  in  the  Proceedings  of  the  United 
States  Nat.  Museum. 

2.  THE  TABLES. 


44 


SPECIES. 

In  Vanderbilt  University  Museum. 

South  Carolina  Pleistocene  Localities. 

Other  Ages 
than 
Pleistocene. 

3 

bo 

1 
1 

6 

oj 

Doctors  Swamp. 

Cainhoy. 

i 

s 

o 

I 

Charleston. 

1 

e 
§ 

i 

i 

Miocene. 

0 

g 

1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 

Mollusca  Pelecypoda. 
Nucula  proxima  Say  

V 
V 

V 

v 
v 

V 
V 
V 

v 

V 
V 

V 

V 
V 

V 

v 
v 

V 
V 

v 

v 
v 

V 

v 

V 

V 

v 
v 

V 

v 

v 

V 

V 
V 

V 
V 

X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 

X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 
X 

X 

X 
X 
X 

X 
X 

X 

X 

X 

X 
X 
X 

X 

X 

X 
X 

X 
X 
X 

X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

X 

X 
X 

X 

X 

X 
X 

X 

X 

X 
X 

X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

X 

X 
X 

0 

0 

X 
X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

z 

X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

z 

z 

z 
I 

X 

z 
z 

X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

z 

X 
X 

K 

z 

X 
X 

z 
z 

X 
X 

X 

z 

X 

X 
X 

X 

z 

X 
X 

X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

z 
z 

X 

X 

X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

z 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

z 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

z 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

z 

X 
X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

Leda   acuta   Conrad  

Yoldia   limatula  Say 

Glycymeris   Americana   Def  ranee  .   ... 

Glycymeris  pectinata  Gmelin  

Area   Noae   Linne 

Area  pexata  Say  

Area  ponderosa  Say  

Barbatia  Adamsii  Smith  

Scapharca   incongrua   Say  

Scapharca   lienosa   Say  

Pteria    colymbus    Bolten 

Atrina  rigida   Dillwyn  

Ostrea  virginica   Gmelin     

Pecten   exasperatus  Sowerby  

Pecten  gibbus  Linne 

Plicatula   gibbosa   Lamarck     

Lima   scabra   Born  

Anomia   simplex   Orbigny 

Mytilus  edulis  Linne  

Mytilus  exustis  Linne 

Modiolus  modiolus  Linne  

Pandora  triliniata  Say 

Crassatellites  lunulatus  Conrad  

Cardita  floridana  Conrad  

Venericardia    tridentata    Say  

Chama  congregata  Conrad 

Echinochama  arcinella  Linne  

Phacoides   crenulatus   Conrad  

Phacoides   radians   Conrad  

Phacoides  multilineatus  Tuom'y&Hms 
Phacoides  trisculcatus  Conrad  

Divaricella   quadrisulcata   Orbigny  
Diplodanta  soror  C.  B    Adams  

Diplodanta   punctata    Sav  

Diplodanta  semiaspera  Philippi      .... 

Cardium   robustum   Solander  

Cardium   isocardia   Conrad  

Cardium   Mortoni   Conrad  

Sportella   constricta  Conrad   (?)  .   . 

Aligena  elevata  Stimpson  

Bornia  Mazyckii  Dall  (?)  

Macrocallistra  nimbosa  Solander  
Dosinia   discus   Reeve               

Chione  grus  Holmes  

45 


6 

"5 

Geographical  Range  of  Living  Representatives. 

I 

| 

s 

K 

i 

.S 

pq 

Kind  of  Shore  or  Bottom 

*, 

bo 

Q 

Preferred  by  Living 

§ 

• 

«w"^ 

Representatives. 

T3 

O  Jj 

Extreme 

Extreme 

I 

f» 

Northern 

Southern 

jD 

Range. 

Range. 

o 

M 

i 

f 

1 

C 

2-100 

Sand,  mud. 

North  Carolina. 

Charlotte  Hbr. 

1 

R 

7-225 

Rhode  Island. 

Sombrero. 

2 

VR 

2-50 

Mud. 

Norway. 

North  Carolina. 

3 

R 

15-65 

Hatteras. 

West  Indies. 

4 

R 

2-175 

Hatteras. 

Barbados. 

5 

R 

1-20 

Hatteras. 

Antilles. 

6 

7 

A 

2-10 

Sandy  Bot.  and  Sh. 

Cape  Cod. 

St.  Thomas. 

8 

R 

5-116 

Hatteras. 

Brazil. 

9 

A 

Hatteras. 

AspinwalL 

10 

A 

Sand,  shells,  mud. 

Cape  Cod. 

Trinidad. 

11 

R 

12 

A 

2-10 

Sand,  mud. 

Cape  Cod. 

Key   West. 

13 

VR 

10-180 

Hatteras. 

Venezuela. 

14 

NU 

Fine  sand,  mud. 

Cape  Fear. 

South  America. 

15 

NU 

Fine  sand,  mud. 

Hatteras. 

Guadaloupe. 

16 

NU 

0-5 

Mud  bottom. 

Prince  Edward  Is. 

Florida  Keys. 

17 

R 

Mud. 

Hatteras. 

Guadaloupe. 

18 

R 

Hatteras. 

Brazil. 

19 

R 

Hatteras. 

Barbados. 

20 

R 

Hatteras. 

Trinidad. 

21 

A 

0-12 

Shelly  Shore  and  Bot. 

Nova  Scotia. 

Martinique. 

22 

VR 

Arctic  Sea. 

Fort  Macon,  N.  C. 

23 

VR 

0-50 

Mud,  sand. 

Charleston. 

Brazil. 

24 

VR 

0-80 

Arctic  Sea. 

North  Carolina. 

25 

R 

Shells. 

Maine. 

Venezuela. 

26 

VR 

6-18 

Sand,  mud. 

Hatteras. 

Gulf  of  Mexico. 

27 

A 

Sand  (?) 

Hatteras. 

Florida  Keys. 

28 

VR 

Mud,  Br.  Wtr. 

South  Carolina. 

Cuba. 

29 

VR 
R 

0-50 
36-124 

Rocks,  gravel. 
Rocks,  gravel. 

Tampa. 
Hatteras. 

Yucatan. 
Gulf  of  Mexico. 

30 
31 

R 

0-52 

Hatteras. 

Yucatan. 

32 

R 

0-26 

Cape  Fear. 

Antilles. 

33 

VA 

2-640 

North  Carolina. 

Brazil.. 

34 

C 

15-124 

Hatteras. 

Cuba. 

35 

C 

5-85 

North  Carolina. 

Porto  Rico. 

36 

VA 

8-287 

Cape  Lookout. 

Grenada. 

37 

C 

0-18 

Hatteras. 

Cuba. 

38 

A 

10-54 

Sand,  gravel. 

Massachusetts. 

Trinidad. 

39 

C 

Tortugas. 

Jamaica. 

40 

R 

Hatteras. 

Rio  Janeiro. 

41 

VR 

14-294 

Hatteras. 

St.   Thomas. 

42 

A 

Sand. 

Cape  May. 

Cuba. 

43 

C 

1-4   ft. 

Sea  weeds. 

Hatteras. 

Trinidad. 

44 

R 

Hatteras. 

Trinidad. 

45 

R 

0-100 

Hatteras. 

Guadaloupe. 

46 

VR 

0-50 

Sand,  mud,  Est. 

Nova  Scotia. 

Brazil. 

47 

NU 

-22 

Sand. 

Cape  Lookout. 

48 

VR 

Cedar  Keys. 

Charlotte  Hbr. 

49 

VR 

2-63 

Maine. 

Hatteras. 

50 

VR 

18-22 

North  Carolina. 

51 

VR 

52 

C 

Hatteras. 

Cuba 

53, 

A 

New    Jersey. 

Vera  Cruz. 

54 

A 

-20 

Cape   Fear. 

West  Indies. 

55 

R 

15-124 

Hatteras. 

Honduras. 

56 

NU 

12-63 

" 

Hatteras. 

Yucatan. 

57 

A 

1-12 

Sand,  mud. 

Nova  Scotia. 

Yucatan. 

58 

46 


SPECIES. 

In  Vanderbilt  University  Museum. 

South  Carolina  Pleistocene  Localities. 

Other  Ages 
than 
Pleistocene. 

Young  Island. 

1 

0 

1 

Abapoola  Creek. 

02 

Cainhoy. 

1 

s 

o 

Charleston. 

1 

1 
5 

jj 

I 

Miocene. 

Pliocene. 

4-5 

I 

59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 

Mollusca  Pelecypoda.—Gon. 

Venua  mercenaria  var.  notata  Say.  .  .  . 
Venus  campechiensis  Gmelin  

V 
V 

V 
V 
V 
V 
V 
V 
V 

V 

V 

V 

V 
V 

V 
V 
V 

V 

V 
V 
V 
V 

V 

V 
V 

V 
V 

V 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 
X 

X 
X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 

X 

X 

X 
X 
X 

X 

X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 

X 

X 

X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

X 

X 

X 
X 
X 

X 

X 
X 

X 

X 
X 

X 
X 
X 

X 

0 
E 

X 
X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

X 

z 

X 
X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

X 

X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

X 
X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

Petricola  pholadiformis  Lamarck  

Petricola  typica  Jonas  

Tellina  alteroata  Say 

65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 
79 
80 
81 
82 
83 
84 
85 
86 
87 
88 
89 
90 
91 
92 
93 
94 
95 
96 
97 
98 
99 
100 
101 
102 
103 

Tellina    lintea    Conrad  

Tellina   Sayi   Deshays 

Strigilla  flexuosa   Say  

Semele  proficua  Pulteney  
Semele   bellastriata   Orbigny  

Solen   viridis    Say                                .  . 

Tagelus  gibbus  Spengler  

Mactra   fragilis   Gmelin 

Mulinia  lateralis  Say  var   b  

Mulinia  Milesii  Holmes  (?)  

Labiosa    canaliculata   Say  

Corbula  contracta  Say  

Gastrochaena   cuneiformis  Spengler... 

47 


| 

c 

1 

I 

Geographical  Range  of  Living  Representatives. 

& 

.s 

H 

Kind  of  Shore  or  Bottom 

+i 

If 

Preferred  by  Living 

1 

~1 

Representatives. 

Extreme 

Extreme 

1 

0> 

Northern 

Southern 

A 

I 

Range. 

Range. 

i 

1 

R 

1-12 

Sand,  mud  shores. 

Cape  Cod. 

•* 
Georgia. 

59 

C 

1-12 

Sand,  mud  Sh.  and  Bot. 

Chesapeake  Bay. 

Cuba. 

60 

NU 

Mud,  clay. 

Prince  Edward  Is. 

St.    Thomas. 

61 

R 

4-6 

Sand,  shells. 

Maine. 

South  Carolina. 

62 

R 

Cape  of  Florida. 

Antilles. 

63 

A 

Hatteras. 

Haiti. 

64 

R 

0-80 

• 

Hatteras. 

Jamaica. 

65 

C 

North  Carolina. 

Yucatan. 

66 

NU 

North  Carolina. 

Trinidad. 

67 

O 

0-50 

Hatteras. 

Antilles. 

68 

R 

2-87 

Mud. 

Cape  Cod. 

Rio  Janeiro. 

69 

VR 

Sand,  mud  Est. 

New  Jersey. 

Brazil. 

70 

VR 

Gravel,  sand,  mud. 

Arctic  Sea. 

Georgia. 

71 

O 

Virginia. 

Guadaloupe. 

72 

VR 

Hatteras. 

Brazil. 

73 

VR 

74 

NU 

Hatteras. 

Gulf  of  Mexico. 

75 

C 

North  Carolina. 

76 

R 

0-50 

Gravel,   sand,   mud. 

Prince  Edward  Is. 

Guadaloupe. 

77 

R 

Hatteras. 

St.  Thomas. 

78 

NU 

New  Jersey. 

Florida  Keys. 

79 

NU 

Fine  sand  flats. 

Labrador. 

Florida. 

80 

NU 

Fine  sand  flats. 

Cape  May. 

Florida,  Texas. 

81 

R 

Sand. 

Rhode  Island. 

Georgia. 

82 

R 

Muddy  Est. 

Cape  Cod. 

Brazil. 

83 

R 

Hatteras. 

Brazil. 

84 

R 

85 

R 

0-10 

Sand. 

Labrador. 

West  Indies. 

86 

VA 

Mud,  sand  flats. 

Masachusetts  Bay. 

Florida  Straits. 

87 

VA 

88 

R 

89 

VA 

Mud,  Est.,  Br.  Wtr. 

Gulf  of  Mexico. 

West  Florida. 

90 

A 

New  Jersey. 

Brazil. 

91 

R 

New  Jersey. 

Brazil. 

92 

R 

93 

R 

0-40 

Sand  Bch.  and  mud  Inl. 

Nova  Scotia. 

South  Carolina. 

94 

R 

12-31 

Beaufort,   N.   C. 

Florida. 

95 

NU 

3-63 

Gravel,  shells. 

Cape  Cod. 

Jamaica. 

96 

NU 

Mud,  sand. 

Hatteras. 

Brazil. 

97 

NU 

Mud,  sand. 

Cape  Cod. 

Brazil. 

98 

R 

Massachusetts. 

South  Carolina. 

99 

R 

0-12 

Connecticut. 

Trinidad. 

100 

NU 

0-25 

Shell   bottom. 

Cape  Fear. 

Guadaloupe. 

101 

R 

Boring  in  wood. 

South  Carolina. 

102 

VR 

0-2 

Sand. 

Cedar  Keys,  Fla. 

Brazil. 

103 

i 

48 


SPECIES. 

In  Vanderbilt  University  Museum. 

South  Carolina  Pleistocene  Localities. 

Other  Peri< 
ods  than 
Pleistocem 

T> 
g 

a 

o 

> 

0 
02 

Abapoola  Creek. 

Doctors  Swamp. 

Cainhoy. 

i 

a 

1 

rt 

Charleston. 

1 

s 

6 

Pre-Miocene. 

Miocene. 

Pliocene. 

1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 
3f 
4f 
41 
42 
4: 
44 
45 
4f 
47 
4b 

5( 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
5 
57 

Mollusca  Gastropoda. 
Tornatina   canaliculata   Say  

V 
V 

V 
V 
V 
V 

V 
V 
V 
V 

V 
V 
V 
V 
V 
V 

V 
V 

V 
V 
V 
V 
V 
V 
V 
V 
V 
V 

V 
V 
V 

V 

V 

v 

V 

V 
V 

V 

MM  M  M  MMMMMMMMMMMMMMM  MMMMMMMMMMM  MMMMMMMM  MMMMMMMMM  MMM 

MMM  M  MMMM  MM  MM  M  M  MMMMMMMMMM  MMMMMMM  M  M 

X 
X 
X 

X 

X 
X 

X 

X 

X 
X 

X 

X 
X 
X 
X 

X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

X 

X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

X 

X 

X 

X 
X 

E 

X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

X 

X 

X 
X 

X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 

X 
X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

X 

X 
X 

X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 

Volva  acicularis  H.  &  A.  Adams  
Melampus  bidentatus  Say  

Terebra  protexta  Conrad  

Mangilia  cerina  Kurtz  &  Stimpson.... 
Cancellaria  reticulata  Linne  

Marginella  limatula  Conrad  

Mitra  wandoensis  Holmes  

Fasciolaria  tulipa  Linne  

Fulgur  perversum  Linne  

Fusus  fllif  ormis  Holmes  

Tritonidia  cancellaria  Conrad  

Columbella   ornata   Ravenel  

Scala  Sayana   Dall       

Eulima  conoidea  Kurtz  &  Stimpson.. 

Turbonilla  reticulata  C.   B.   Adams... 

(  ?)   Turbonilla   pupoides  Orbigny  

Odontostomia  seminuda  C.  B.  Adams. 

Seila  Adamsii  H    C    Lea  

Bittium   CP  rithidioides  Dall 

49 


jj 

1 

Geographical  Range  of  Living  Representatives. 

1 

1 

.s 

Kind  of  Shore  or  Bottom 

a 

Preferred  by  Living 

1 

cf 

Representatives. 

Extreme 

Extreme 

§ 

So 

Northern 

Southern 

* 

8 

Range. 

Range. 

1 

! 

VA 

0-63 

Muddy  Shore  and  Bot. 

Cape  Cod. 

Florida  Keys. 

1 

R 

Stagnant  Water. 

Massachusetts. 

Florida. 

2 

VR 

3 

R 

Swamps,   Br.   Water. 

Massachusetts  Bay. 

Gulf  of  Mexico. 

4 

A 

Maryland. 

Venezuela. 

5 

NU 

Hatteras. 

Georgia. 

6 

NU 

2-50 

Weedy  Bot. 

Hatteras. 

Texas. 

7 

A 

3-10 

Mud. 

Cape  Cod. 

Fernandina. 

8 

R 

5-30 

Hatteras. 

Guadaloupe. 

9 

•     A 

0-2 

(?)  Sandy  beaches. 

Hatteras. 

West  Indies. 

10 

C 

North  Carolina. 

Trinidad. 

11 

C 

25-100 

Sand  and  gravel. 

Hatteras. 

South  Carolina. 

12 

R 

Hatteras. 

Jamaica. 

13 

VR 

12-60 

Gravel. 

Hatteras. 

Gulf  of  Mexico. 

14 

R 

0-54 

North    Carolina. 

Florida,  Texas. 

15 

R 

0-10 

Hatteras. 

Carthagena. 

16 

R 

0-10 

Hatteras. 

St.  Thomas. 

17 

R 

0-50 

Sand. 

Hatteras. 

Gulf  of  Mexico. 

18 

NU 

0-10 

Rocks,  Gravel,  sand. 

Cape  Cod. 

Gulf  of  Mexico. 

19 

R 

0-8 

Hatteras. 

Gulf  of  Mexico. 

20 

R 

Cape  Cod. 

Gulf  of  Mexico. 

21 

R 

22 

R 

23 

R 

24 

R 

25 

R 

26 

C 

Jupiter  Inlet. 

Darien. 

27 

VR 

Hatteras. 

Vera  Cruz. 

28 

NU 

0-40 

Sandy  Sh.  and  Bot. 

Nova  Scotia. 

St.  Augustine. 

29 

C 

North  Carolina. 

Barbados. 

30 

C 

0-10 

Mud,  Br.  Water. 

Nova  Scotia. 

Tampa. 

31 

C 

32 

0 

0-10 

Rocks,  shells. 

Massachusetts  Bay. 

Florida  Keys. 

33 

0 

0-12 

Rock,  shell,  weeds. 

Prince  Edward  Is. 

Florida  Keys. 

34 

VR 

North  Carolina. 

Antilles. 

35 

NU 

1-3 

Muddy  shore. 

Cape  Cod. 

Florida    Keys. 

36 

R 

0-10 

Rocks,  shells. 

Nova  Scotia. 

St.   Augustine. 

37 

C 

Sand,  mud. 

Connecticut. 

Texas. 

38 

C 

6-40 

Virginia. 

Key   West. 

39 

NU 

Shelly. 

Cape  Cod. 

South  Carolina. 

40 

C 

Shelly  and  muddy. 

Cape  Cod. 

Charlotte  Harbor. 

41 

R 

-8 

Muddy  Bot. 

Hatteras. 

West  Indies. 

42 

A 

0-2 

Muddy  flats. 

Hatteras. 

St.   Thomas. 

43 

FA 

2-107 

Shelly  Bot. 

Nova  Scotia. 

Barbados. 

44 

FA 

10-40 

Muddy  Bot. 

Maine. 

South  Carolina. 

45 

C 

0-60 

North  Carolina. 

Jamaica. 

46 

C 

47 

NU 

15-63 

North   Carolina. 

Santo  Domingo. 

48 

R 

Jamaica,  Cuba. 

49 

NU 

12-80 

North  Carolina. 

Florida. 

50 

R 

Massachusetts  Bay. 

St.  Augustine. 

51 

NU 

2-10 

Shells,  gravel. 

Prince  Edward  Is. 

Florida  Keys. 

52 

R 

North  Carolina. 

West   Indies. 

53 

R 

Hatteras. 

Aspinwall. 

54 

VR 

Massachusetts. 

West  Indies. 

55 

R 

Cape  Lookout. 

Santo  Domingo. 

56 

R 

-22 

North  Carolina. 

Antilles. 

57 

4-P.  D. 


Other  Peri< 

g 

South  Carolina  Pleistocene  Localities. 

ods  than 

I 

Pleistocene 

g 

SPECIES. 

1 

£> 

J4 

p. 

^, 

T) 

<u 

J 

. 

1 

I 

'« 

1 

1 

>'. 

i 

1 

• 

S 

o 

§ 

S 

i 

0 

£ 

4i 

1 

.2 

oi 

, 

a 

I 

i 

1 

1 

g 

\ 

6 

6 

£ 

& 

1 

Mollusca  Gastropoda.  —  Con. 

RR 

Littorina   irrorata   Say  

y 

x 

x 

x 

x 

x 

x 

60 

Adeorbis  Holmesii  Dall  

y 

x 

x 

61 

Calyptraea  centralis  Conrad  

y 

X 

x 

x 

X 

x 

x 
x 

as 

C.  aculeata  Gmelin  var.  costata  Linne 

V 

X 

X 

X 

z 

X 

y 

x 

x 

65 

Crepidula  plana  Say  

y 

x 

x 

x 

x 

66 

Natica  pusilla  Say  

y 

x 

x 

67 

V 

X 

X 

x 

X 

x 

X 

x 

Polynices  heros  Say     [Verrill]  

60 

y 

x 

x 

70 

Angaria  crassa  Holmes      .            .  . 

x 

x 

71 

Cochliolepis  nautiliformis  Holmes.... 

X 

x 

•% 

72 

Vitrinella  multicarinata  Stimpson.... 

X 

X 

X 

X 

7? 

Fissuridea  alternata  Say  

y 

x 

-jr 

x 

Cavolinia  gibbosa  Rang   (?)  

frr 

x 

76 

Balanus  perforatus   (Bruguiere)   Dar- 

win 

V 

X 

X 

I 

Geographical  Range  of  Living  Representatives. 

1 

1 

•i 

i 

2 

i 

3 

P5 

Kind  of  Shore  or  Bottom 

C 

Preferred  by  Living 

1 

*! 

Representatives. 

Extreme 
Northern 

Extreme 
Southern 

3 

1 

Range. 

Range. 

s 

• 

1 

I 

NU 

0-10 

Mud,   estuaries. 

Rhode  Island. 

Jamaica. 

58 

-deep 

Hatteras.                      • 

West  Indies. 

59 

R 

60 

R 

Hatteras. 

South   America. 

61 

0 

0-15 

Shells,  gravel 

Prince  Edward  Is. 

South    America. 

62 

R 

0-589 

Cape  Lookout. 

Barbados. 

63 

C 

0-22 

Shells. 

Nova  Scotia. 

Florida. 

64 

C 

0-487 

Shells. 

Prince  Edward  Is. 

Trinidad. 

65 

C 

2-15 

Sand,  shells. 

Massachusetts. 

Florida  Keys. 

66 

A 

Sand,  mud  beaches. 

Massachusetts  Bay. 

Vera  Cruz. 

67 

VR 

0-40 

Sand,  mud  beaches. 

Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence. 

Georgia. 

68 

NU 

New  York. 

Martinique. 

69 

VR 

70 

R 

South   Carolina. 

Florida  Keys. 

71 

R 

0-15 

Hatteras. 

Florida. 

72 

NU 

1-50 

Hatteras. 

Barbados. 

73 

R 

Pelagic 

North  Lat.  43°. 

North  Lat.  41°. 

74 

VR 

Massachusetts. 

South  Carolina. 

75 

76 

3.  LISTS  OF  PLEISTOCENE  FOSSILS  FROM  OTHER  STATES. 
a.  Florida. 


1.  Ameria  scalaris  Dall. 

2.  Tornatina  canaliculate,  Say. 

3.  Bulla  striata  Bruguiere. 

4.  Terebra  concava  Say. 

5.  Terebra  protexta  Conrad. 

6.  Terebra  dislocata  Say. 

7.  Conus  pygmaeus  Reeve. 

8.  Mangilia  plicosa  Adams. 

9.  Mangilia  cerinella  Dall. 

10.  Oliva  litter  ata  Lamarck. 

11.  Olivella  mutica  Say. 

12.  Marginella  apicina  Menke. 

13.  Marginella  minuta  Pfeiffer. 

14.  Fasciolaria    gigantea    Kie- 
ner. 

15.  Fasciolaria      distans      La- 
marck. 

16.  Fasciolaria  tulipa  Linne. 

17.  Fulgur  perversum  Linne. 

18.  Fulgur  pyrum  Dillwyn. 

19.  Melon gena  corona  Gmelin. 

20.  Tritonidea  tincta  Conrad. 

21.  Nassa  vibex  Say. 

22.  Anachis  avara  Say. 

23.  Astyris  lunata  Say. 

24.  Urosalpinx  perrugatus  Con- 
rad. 

25.  Urosalpinx  tampaensis  Con- 
rad. 

26.  Eupleura  caudata  Say. 

27.  Eupleura  caudata  var  sul- 
cidentata  Dall. 

28.  Muricidea  multangula  Phil- 
ippi. 

29.  Scald  lineata  Say. 

30.  Scala  Frielei  Dall. 

3 1 .  Pyramidella    cr  enulata 
Holmes. 


32.  Eulimella  sp. 

33.  Turbonilla  interrupta   Tot- 
ten. 

34.  Turbonilla  sp. 

35.  Odontostomia    caloosaensis 
Dall. 

36.  Odontostomia  c  o  n  oid  e  a 
Brocchi. 

37.  Odontostomia  fusca  C.   B. 
Adams. 

38.  Odontostomia  sp. 

39.  Pyrula  papyrata  Say. 

40.  S trombus  pugilis  Linne. 

41.  Cerithium  mure  arum  Say. 

42.  Vermetus    irregularis    Or- 
bigny. 

43.  Vermetus  varians  Orbigny. 

44.  Vivapora  georgiana  Lea. 

45.  Ampullaria       hopotonensis 
Lea. 

46.  Rissoa     callistrophia}     var. 
Dall. 

47.  Crepidula  fornicata  Say. 

48.  Crepidula  convexa  Say. 

49.  Crepidula  plana  Say. 

50.  Natica  pusilla  Say. 

51.  P-olynices  duplicata  Say. 

52.  Teinostoma  cryptospira  Ver- 

rill. 

53.  Achanthocites       spiculosus 
Reeve. 

54.  Fissuridea  alternata  Say. 

55.  ^4rca  secticostata  Reeve. 

56.  Area  occidentalis  Philippi. 

57.  Area  umbonata  Lamarck. 

58.  Area  ponder osa  Say. 

59.  Scapharca  transversa  Say. 

60.  Pinna  cornea  Gmelin. 


53 


61.  Atrina  rigida  Dillwyn. 

62.  Atrina  serrata  Sowerby. 

63.  Ostrea  virginica  Gmelin. 

64.  Pecten  exaspcratus  Sower- 
by. 

65.  Pecten  ornatus  Lamarck. 

66.  Pecten  gibbus  Linne. 

67.  Pecten  gibbus  var.  disloca- 
tus  Say. 

68.  Pecten  gibbus  var.  irradians 
Lamarck. 

69.  Spondylus   echinatus   Mar- 
tyn. 

70.  Anomia  simplex  Orbigny. 

71.  Modiolus  demissus  Dillwyn. 

72.  Cardita     domingensis     Or- 
bigny. 

73.  Cardita  Horidana  Conrad. 

74.  Venericardia  tridentata  Say. 

75.  Venericardia  perplana  Con- 
rad. 

76.  Cyrena  Horidana  Conrad. 

77.  Cyrena  caroliniana  Bosc. 

78.  Sportella  constricta  Conrad. 

79.  Codakia  orbicularis  Linne. 

80.  Lucina    chrysostoma    Phil- 
ippi. 

81.  Phacoides  pectinatus  Gme- 
lin. 

82.  Phacoides  muricatus  Speng- 
ler. 

83.  Phacoides  multilineatus 
Tuomey  and  Holmes. 

84.  Phacoides  Horidana  Conrad. 

85.  Phacoides  nassula  Conrad. 

86.  Cardium  isocardia  Linne. 

87.  Cardium    robustum    Solan- 
der. 

88.  Cardium  muricatum  Linne. 

89.  Cardium      spinosum      var. 
spinosum  Meuchen. 


90.  Cardium  serratum  Linne. 

91.  Cardium  Mortoni  Conrad. 

92.  Montacuta  Horidana  Dall. 

93.  Diplodanta  punctata  Say. 

94.  Dosinia  discus  Reeve. 

95.  Dosinia  elegans  Conrad. 

96.  Transennella  Conradina 
Dall. 

97.  Transennella  caloosana 
Dall 

98.  Macrocallistra  nimbosa  So- 
lander. 

99.  Chione  cancellata  Linne. 

100.  Anomalocardia      caloosana 
Dall. 

101.  Anomalocardia      brasiliana 
Gmelin. 

1 02.  Venus  campechiensis  Gme- 
lin. 

103.  Parastarte    triquetra    Con- 
rad. 

104.  Angulus  versicolor  Cozzens. 

105.  Angulus  sybariticus  Dall. 

106.  Tellina  umbra  Dall. 

107.  Tagelus  gibbus  Spengler. 

108.  Tagelus  divisus  Spengler. 

109.  Donax  variabilis  Say. 

no.  Gemma  gemma  var.   pur- 

purea  Lea. 
in.  Labiosa  canaliculata  Say. 

112.  Rangia  cuneata  Gray. 

113.  Mulinia  later alis  Say. 

114.  Mulinia  lateralis  var.   cor- 
buloides  Reeve. 

115.  Ervilia  concentrica  Gould. 

1 1 6.  Co ngeria  lencophaeata  Con- 
rad. 

117.  P kolas  campechiensis  Gme- 
lin. 

1 18.  Barnea  costata  Linne. 

119.  Gastrochaena      cuneiformis 
Spengler. 


54 


b.  Cornfield  Harbor,  Maryland. 


i. 

2. 

3- 

4- 
5- 
6. 

7- 
8. 

9- 
10. 
ii. 

12. 


14. 


16. 

17- 
18. 
19. 

20. 


Actaeon  melonoides  Con- 
rad. 

Tornatina  canaliculata  Say. 
Mangilia  cerina  Kurtz  and 
Stimpson. 

Nassa  trivitata  Say. 
Ilynassa  obsoleta  Say. 
Fulgur  carica  Linne. 
Fulgur  pyrum  Dillwyn. 
Astyris  lunata  Say. 
Urosalpinx  cinereus  Say. 
Eupleura  caudata  Say. 

Sayana  Dall. 

lineata  Say. 
Turbonilla  interrupta  Tot- 
ten. 

Turbonilla  reticulata  C.  B. 
Adams. 

Odontostomia  seminuda 
Adams. 

Crepidula  plana  Say. 
Crepidula  fornicata  Say. 
Crepidula  convexa  Say. 
Polynices  duplicatus  Say. 
Nucula  proxima  Say. 


21.  Ltfda  acwto  Conrad. 

22.  Yoldia  limatula  Say. 

23.  .^raz  ponderosa  Say. 

24.  Scapharca  transversa  Say. 

25.  Mytilus  hamatus  Say. 

26.  Pandora  triliniata  Say. 

27.  Callocardia  Sayana  Conrad. 

28.  Venus  mercenaria  Linne. 

29.  Venus  mercenaria  var.  n0- 
tato  Say. 

30.  Petricola  pholadiformis  La- 
marck. 

31.  Macoma  balthica  Linne. 

32.  Macoma  Virginiana  Conrad. 

33.  Ensis  directus  Conrad. 

34.  Tagelus  gibbus  Spengler. 

35.  Mulinia  lateralis  Say. 

36.  Mulinia  lateralis  Say  var.  b. 

37.  Rangia  cuneata  Gray. 

38.  My  a  arenaria  Linne. 

39.  Corbula  contracta  Say. 

40.  Barnea  costata  Linne. 

41.  Dentalium  sp. 

42.  Foraminifera. 


c.  Sankoty  Head,  Massachusetts. 


1.  Buccinum  undatum  Linne. 

2.  Ilynassa  obsoleta  Conrad. 

3.  Crucibulum  striatum  Say. 

4.  Fusus  scalariformis  Stimp- 
son. 

5.  Urosalpinx  cinereus  Say. 

6.  Cerithiopsis  Greenii    C.  B. 
Adams. 

7.  Odostomia  triiida  Gould. 

8.  Turbonilla  interrupta  Tot- 
ten. 

9.  Margarita  obscura  Gould. 


10.  Caecum  pulchellum  Stimp- 
son. 

11.  Rissoa  aculeus  Stimpson. 

12.  Crepidula  fornicata  Say. 

13.  Crepidula  plana  Say. 

14.  Crepidula  convexa  Say. 

15.  Skenea     planorbis     Forbes 
and  Hanley. 

1 6.  Polynices  heros  Say. 

17.  Area  pexata  Say. 

1 8.  Scapharca  transversa  Say. 

19.  Mytilus  hamatus  Say. 


55 


20.  Modiolus  modiolus  Linne. 

21.  Venericardia  borealis  Con- 
rad. 

22.  Cyclocardia          novangliae 
Morse. 

23.  Ostrea  Virginica  Gmelin. 

24.  Anomia  aculeata  Gmelin. 

25.  Astarte  undata  Gould. 

26.  Astarte  castanea  Say. 

27.  Astarte  quadrans  Gould. 

28.  Venus  mercenaria  Linne. 

29.  Venus  mercenaria  var.  w0- 
tato  Say. 

30.  Ensis  directus  Conrad. 


31.  Ceronia  arctata  H.  and  A. 
Adams. 

32.  Spisula  solidissima  Dillwyn. 

33.  Mesodesma  Jamesii. 

34.  Cumingia    tellinoides    Con- 
rad. 

35.  Mya  arenaria  Linne. 

36.  Panopea  sp. 

37.  Balanus  eburneus  Gould. 

38.  Balanus  porcatus. 

39.  Panopeus  (claws).  ' 

40.  Clione     sulphurea     Verrill 
(sponge). 

41.  Serpula     dianthus     Verrill 
(Annelid). 


4.    DISCUSSION  OF  AND  CONCLUSIONS  FROM  THE  TABLES. 

According  to  Tuomey,  at  White  Point  Creek  in  northeastern 
Horry,  very  near  the  ocean  shore  line,  there  is  a  deposit  of  shells 
among  which  are  Venus  mercenaria,  Ostrea  Virginica,  Scapharca 
mcongruu,  Area  Noae  and  a  species  of  Pectunculus.  This  deposit 
is  doubtless  Pleistocene,  as  he  claimed.  Again  Tuomey  gives  a  short 
list  of  fossils  from  Laurel  Hill  bluff,  northeastern  Georgetown 
County,  which  includes  Area  ponderosa,  Scapharca  campechiensis, 
Mulinia  later alis,  Spisula  similis,  Donax  variabilis,  Rangia  cuneata, 
and  Oliva  litterata.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  fossil  bed  here  is 
eight  feet  above  tide,  the  highest  elevation  yet  known  for  the  Pleisto- 
cene fossil  deposits  of  the  State.  At  other  places  in  Georgetown 
County  southward  from  Laurel  Hill,  especially  along  Winyah  Canal, 
characteristic  Pleistocene  fossils  have  been  found.  These  localities 
in  the  northern  part  of  the  Coastal  belt  of  the  State,  combined  with 
two  or  three  others  mentioned  by  Tuomey  as  occurring  in  northern 
Charleston  County,  together  with  the  localities  listed  in  these  tables, 
show  plainly  that  along  the  entire  shore  of  the  State  the  deposits  of 
Pleistocene  fossils  surely  extend  from  White  Point  Creek  in  the 
north  to  Beaufort,  and  probably  beyond  toward  the  south,  in  one 
continuous  sheet,  except  where  cut  through  by  streams. 

As  to  the  ages  in  which  these  species  occur,  it  is  seen  that  at  least 
95  per  cent  of  them,  as  known  certainly,  live  along  the  coast  today. 
It  is  possible  that  the  percentage  will  run  higher  when  more  thorough 


56 

investigations  have  been  made  into  the  present  fauna  of  the  south- 
eastern Atlantic  coast  of  the  United  States.  But,  as  it  is,  we  have  a 
reconfirmation  that  the  beds  here  considered  are  without  doubt  Pleis- 
tocene. It  is  further  seen  that  about  60  per  cent,  of  these  Pleistocene 
species  are  also  found  in  the  Pliocene  of  the  neighboring  regions. 
This  shows  that  the  transit  from  Pliocene  to  Pleistocene  times  and 
conditions  brought  no  great  or  sudden  changes  with  it  in  South 
Carolina.  The  probability  is  that,  with  the  advance  of  the  ice-sheet 
from  the  north  into  the  latitude  of  New  Jersey,  the  accompanying 
cold  was  a  long  time  reaching  South  Carolina,  and  there  was  no 
widespread  destruction  of  Pliocene  forms  on  this  part  of  the  coast 
whatever  may  have  been  the  effect  produced  farther  north.  This 
phase  of  the  subject  will  come  up  later  in  the  discussion,  and  need 
not  be  dwelt  upon  here.  It  may  also  be  observed  that  about  30  per 
cent,  of  the  species  are  also  Miocene.  This  is  about  what  we  might 
expect  if  there  had  been  no  great  or  sweeping  changes,  and  if  only 
the  ordinary  forces  of  evolution  had  been  at  work  combined  with 
moderate  changes  in  environment.  Only  occasionally  is  a  form  seen 
to  run  back  into  the  Oligocene  or  the  Eocene — one  proof  that  the 
transition  from  Oligocene  to  Miocene  conditions  was  accompanied 
by  influences  more  destructive  to  life  than  have  been  those  of  any 
transition  since  that  time. 

In  accord  with  well-recognized  and  almost  universally  adopted 
principles,  it  is  assumed,  without  taking  the  time  to  prove  it,  that  any 
given  species  lives  under  approximately  similar  conditions  of  tem- 
perature, depth,  shore  or  bottom,  salinity,  current,  or  other  environ- 
mental condition  in  whatever  geologic  age  it  has  been  found.  For  in 
case  the  species,  as  has  just  been  said,  should  little  by  little  be  changed 
with  gradual  advances  into  a  distinctly  different  habitat  to  such  a 
degree  as  to  be  clearly  distinguishable  from  what  it  was  originally, 
then  it  comes  to  be  no  longer  regarded  as  the  same  species,  but  as  a 
new  species,  distinct  from  the  old.  Therefore,  with  respect  to  the 
matter  in  hand,  it  is  safe  to  assume  that  a  species  had,  in  the  main, 
the  same  conditions  of  temperature,  the  same  kind  of  bottom,  the 
same  fondness  for  or  aversion  to  salt  water  or  brackish  water,  or  to 
a  shore  of  vigorous  waves  or  a  region  of  quiet,  or  to  shallow  water  or 
deeper,  etc.,  in  the  Pleistocene  Period  that  it  has  today.  Now,  these 
conditions  for  recent  forms  have  been  fairly  well  worked  out  by 
Verrill  and  Smith  on  the  southeastern  coast  of  New  England,  and 
by  others  along  the  Atlantic  coast  farther  south,  whose  work  has 
been  tabulated  by  Dall  in  Bulletin  37  of  the  Proceedings  of  the  Na- 


57 

tional  Museum,  and  given  by  him  in  describing  species  in  the  Trans- 
actions of  the  Wagner  Free  Institute  of  Science.  These  have  been 
the  publications  most  relied  upon  in  making  out  depth  and  geographic 
ranges  for  the  living  forms.  The  literature  available  has  not  always 
contained  the  results  of  the  latest  discoveries  concerning  the  habitat 
of  recent  species.  When  these  discoveries  are  made  known,  this 
table,  especially  in  the  columns  headed  "Geographical  Range,"  may 
be  somewhat  modified. 

Concerning  Depth. — Of  all  the  conditions  of  habitat,  none  is  of 
much  greater  influence  upon  a  form  than  depth.  From  the  investi- 
gations of  Verrill  and  Smith  along  the  southeastern  coast  of  New 
England,  it  is  seen  that  each  zone  of  depth,  if  that  word  can  be  so 
employed,  has  its  peculiar  life- forms,  which,  should  they  migrate 
much  beyond  their  proper  depth  range,  would  perish.  Of  course, 
many  forms  live  equally  well  in  two  or  more  zones,  but  others  seem 
to  be  confined  to  one  particular  depth  zone,  especially  such  forms  as 
live  between  tides.  The  main  reason  that  depth  is  an  important  fac- 
tor in  the  distribution  of  life-forms  is  that  variations  in  depth  in  sea 
water  brings  about  a  variation  in  temperature,  though  variation  in 
pressure,  too,  is  not  to  be  underestimated.  Again,  in  shallow  bays 
and  estuaries  the  water  is  subjected  to  greater  extremes  of  heat  and 
cold  than  is  the  case  on  the  open  coast  at  equal  depths,  and  only  cer- 
tain forms  can  adapt  themselves  to  these. marked  extremes.  At  cer- 
tain stages  of  its  existence,  a  species  would  be  killed  by  a  lowering  of 
the  temperature  of  the  water  by  5°  F.,  or  even  less.  Brooks's  experi- 
ments in  Chesapeake  Bay  showed  that  a  fall  of  2°  F.  in  the  tempera- 
ture of  the  water  killed  all  the  swimming  larvae  of  Ostrea  mrginica. 
A  rise  of  twice  that  many  degrees,  remarks  Ball,  would  probably 
have  only  hastened  their  development.  The  general  rule  is  that  "it 
is  always  easier  for  a  cold-water  invertebrate  to  survive  in  warmer 
water  than  it  is  accustomed  to  than  for  one  belonging  to  warm 
waters  to  persist  when  there  is  a  change  to  a  lower  temperature."  An 
increase  in  depth  brings  about  a  lowering  of  the  temperature,  and 
this  is  the  ground  for  the  importance  attached  to  depth  range.  Now 
a  study  of  the  tables  shows  that  most  of  the  species  of  which  record 
is  had  belong  to  the  shallow-water  zone  exclusively,  only  30  out  of 
the  179  species  listed  ranging  over  fifty  fathoms  in  depth,  and  some 
of  these  very  little  over  the  fifty-fathom  line.  Only  thirteen  species 
range  deeper  than  the  loo-fathom  line,  and  these  show  a  preferred 
range  much  shallower  than  that,  as  the  following  list  clearly  shows : 

Pteria  colymbus,  10180,  usually  shallow;   Diplodanta  semiaspera, 


58 

14-294;  Glycymeris  pectinata,  2-175;  Leda  acuta,  7-225;  Barbatia 
Adamsii,  5-116;  Phacoides  amantus,  2-640;  usually  shallow;  Pha- 
coides  crenulatus,  15-124;  Phacoides  multilineatus,  8-287;  Veneri- 
cardia  tridentata,  36-124;  Chione  cribraria,  15-124;  Turbonilla 
interrupta,  2-107;  Crepidula  aculeata  var.  costata,  0-589,  commonly 
0-25 ;  Crepidula  plana,  0-487,  usually  shallow.  Also,  it  must  be 
taken  into  account  that  Pteria  colymbus,  Diplodanta  semiaspera  and 
Venericardia  tridentata  are  very  rare  forms,  and  that  Leda  acuta, 
Glycymeris  pectinata,  Barbatia  Adamsii,  Chione  cribraria,  and 
Crepidula  aculeata  var.  costata  are  almost  as  rare  in  the  Pleistocene 
of  South  Carolina.  This  fact  could  be  interpreted  to  mean  that  these 
forms  may  even  have  had  their  preferred  habitat  close  to  the  lower 
limit  in  depth,  and  yet  a  few  individuals  have  lived  in  shallow  water ; 
but  we  have  record,  in  case  of  two  of  them,  that  they  prefer  the 
shallower  depths.  Two  other  of  these  species  are  seen  to  have  a 
very  wide  geographical  range :  Turbonilla  interrupta  from  Nova 
Scotia  to  the  Barbados,  and  Crepidula  plana  from  Prince  Edward 
Island  to  Trinidad.  Now,  the  general  rule  for  a  species  migrating 
southward  is  to  seek  the  cooler  waters  it  is  accustomed  to  by  sinking 
deeper  and  deeper.  The  probability  is  that  these  two  forms 
reach  their  greatest  depth  range  much  farther  south  than  along 
the  South  Carolina  coast.  The  other  three  species  are  all  Pha- 
coides, and  it  is  well  known  that  one  of  them,  Phacoides  amian- 
tus,  usually  lives  in  shallow  waters.  Now,  in  the  absence  of  con- 
tradictory evidence,  it  is  usually  safe  to  assume  that  what  is  pre- 
ferred by  one  species  of  a  genus  is  probably  preferred  by  the  others. 
So  the  three  species  of  Phacoides  may  be  considered  as  preferring 
shallow  waters.  Of  the  seventeen  forms  having  their  maximum 
depth  range  between  fifty  and  one  hundred  fathoms,  some  are  rare 
and  others  very  rare,  and  need  not  be  given  too  much  weight;  and 
the  others  still  have  abundant  opportunity,  without  an  exception,  of 
having  a  much  shallower  habitat  than  fifty  fathoms,  almost  all  of 
them  having  an  upper  range  of  eight  fathoms  or  less.  It  seems  true, 
then,  that  on  the  whole  these  species  today  prefer  a  shallow  water 
habitat,  many  of  them  living  between  tides  even,  as  the  absence  of 
depth  figures,  following  Dall,  may  generally  mean.  They  constitute 
what  may  be  called  a  littoral  facies.  The  conclusion  from  this  study 
of  depth  is  that  the  Pleistocene  species  of  South  Carolina  lived,  on  the 
whole,  in  shallow  water  and  constituted  a  littoral  facies.  The  value 
of  this  conclusion  will  be  more  evident  later,  when  we  come  to  con- 
sider geographical  range. 


59 

Concerning  Shore  and  Bottom  Conditions. — Investigations  show 
that  bays  and  other  partially  inclosed  bodies  of  sea  water  maintain  a 
different  aggregation  of  life-forms  from  that  found  out  on  the  open 
coast,  where  the  waves  are  more  vigorous  and  life  more  strenuous. 
The  group  of  animals  on  sandy  bottom  is  markedly  different  from 
that  on  muddy  bottom;  so  also  do  rocky  and  shelly  bottoms  differ 
from  each  other  in  the  kind  of  animals  they  maintain  and  from  the 
other  kinds  of  bottom  mentioned.  The  same  holds  good  for  the 
shores ;  they  differ  from  one  another  and  from  the  various  kinds  of 
bottom  in  the  species  preferring  them.  Of  course,  some  species  ap- 
pear to  thrive  equally  well  on  two  or  more  kinds  of  bottom  or  shore ; 
but,  on  the  other  hand,  each  kind  of  bottom  or  shore  has  its  own  pecu- 
liar characteristic  species.  In  general,  it  may  be  asserted  with  some 
degree  of  assurance  that  all  the  species  of  any  one  genus,  if  there 
is  nothing  known  to  the  contrary,  prefer  similar  shore  or  bottom  con- 
ditions. For  example,  if  Scapharca  transverse,  is  always  found  pre- 
ferring sandy  shores,  it  is  not  far  wrong  to  say  that  other  species 
of  Scapharca  very  like  also  prefer  sandy  shores.  In  the  tables,  how- 
ever, this  supposition  has  not  been  employed,  and  any  word  used  in 
describing  the  kind  of  shore  or  bottom  inhabited  by  any  species  is 
given  on  the  authority  of  such  workers  as  Verrill,  Dall,  Gould,  Say, 
Binney,  Fisher,  Walther  and  Tryon.  In  discussing  this  phase  of  the 
subject,  however,  it  does  not  seem  amiss  to  employ  the  supposition 
just  mentioned.  Again,  the  kind  of  material  upon  which  the  marl 
beds  rest  and  which  is  mixed  in  with  the  shells  as  they  are  exposed  to- 
day, where  there  is  evidence  to  suppose  that  these  shells  have  not 
been  carried  by  currents  and  deposited  as  they  are  found,  but  occupy 
the  same  position  in  the  main  today  that  they  occupied  when  they 
were  living  in  Pleistocene  times — then,  let  it  be  said,  this  material 
must  be  taken  into  account  and  given  serious  weight  in  drawing  con- 
clusions concerning  the  shore  and  bottom  of  the  Pleistocene  seas  and 
bays. 

From  the  tables  it  seems  that  about  thirty  species  of  the  entire 
number  are  found  living  in  mud.  Of  this  number,  nineteen  prefer 
the.  mud  to  any  other  kind  of  bottom,  and  thirteen  seem  to  be  found 
only  on  muddy  bottom,  and  six  are  found  in  the  mud  of  estuaries  or 
other  places  of  brackish  water.  More  than  half  the  mud-loving 
species  are  the  only  species  of  their  respective  genera,  and  so  can 
be  of  little  weight  in  attributing  this  characteristic  to  others  of  their 
genera.  Forty-six  species  are  found  to  live  on  sandy  or  gravelly 
bottom  or  shore,  and  of  these,  twenty-nine  prefer  sand  above  all 


6o 

other  kinds,  and  thirteen  are  found  living  only  in  sand.  Here,  for 
the  most  part,  among  the  sand-lovers,  each  species  is  not  the  only 
one  of  its  genus,  as  is  the  case  with  more  than  half  the  mud-lovers. 
So  there  is  this  evidence  that  a  good  many  more  species  live  in  the 
sand  than  in  the  mud.  A  few  species  prefer  shelly  bottom,  and  occa- 
sionally one  is  mentioned  as  having  been  found  on  rocky  bottom  or 
shore,  but  never  rocky  alone — always  some  other  kind  in  addition  to 
the  rocky.  This  is  well,  for  there  is  no  evidence  of  a  rocky  shore's 
existing  along  the  South  Carolina  coast  either  in  Recent  or  Pleisto- 
cene times.  It  is  seen,  at  Young  Island  and  Stono  River,  the  two 
places  which  furnish  by  far  the  greater  number  of  species,  that  the 
beds  of  shells  have  quantities  of  sand  containing  mud  or  clay  mixed 
with  them.  At  one  or  two  other  places  in  the  State  the  mixed-in 
material  is  pretty  much  all  mud  or  clay,  as  is  the  case  at  Maxyck 
Ferry  on  the  Santee,  where  a  few  species,  like  Mulinia  lateralis,  have 
been  found.  This  is  just  what  our  tables  would  lead  us  to  expect.  So 
the  conclusion  here,  as  reached  by  a  study  of  life- forms  and  of 
actual  beds  as  found,  is  that,  though  mud-loving  species  are  found 
in  abundance,  and  also  some  lovers  of  shelly  bottom,  yet  the  weight  of 
evidence  is  in  favor  of  a  sandy  bottom  and  shore  for  the  Pleistocene 
sea.  Before  leaving  this  phase  of  the  subject,  it  is  well  to  note  that, 
of  the  mud-loving  forms,  some  species  are  very  abundant  as  Pleisto- 
cene fossils.  Rangia  cuneata  is  found  in  very  great  abundance  un- 
derneath Charleston,  whole  beds  being  made  up  of  it  down  about 
fifteen  feet  beneath  the  surface.  Now,  this  is  one  of  the  estuarine 
forms,  and  probably  indicates  that  at  one  time  during  the  Pleistocene 
Period,  the  Ashley  and  Cooper  rivers  flowing  into  a  somewhat  land- 
locked bay  as  they  do  today,  there  was  much  mud  and  brackish-water 
conditions  that  just  suited  Rangia  cuneata.  Up  the  Potomac  from 
Cornfield  Harbor,  Maryland,  about  eighteen  miles,  is  found  an  ex- 
tensive bed  of  this  species.  Now,  at  Cornfield  Harbor,  Rangia  cune- 
ata is  found,  but  is  rare.  The  supposition  here  is  that  the  water  was 
brackish  enough  at  that  distance  up  what  was  then  an  estuary  as  to 
just  suit  this  species  and  too  brackish  for  much  of  anything  else,  that 
while  the  deposit  was  being  formed  at  Cornfield  Harbor  under  marine 
conditions  that  farther  up  the  river  was  being  formed  under 
estuarine  conditions.  In  regard  to  the  South  Carolina  Pleistocene 
forms,  it  may  be  said  that  Rangia  cuneata  is  only  one  of  a  half-dozen 
that  may  have  had  just  such  estuaries  with  brackish  water  to  live  in. 
With  the  exception  of  this  species,  the  estuarine  species  are  not  at  all 
abundant  in  the  Pleistocene  localities  of  the  State;  indeed,  three  of 


6i 

them  are  very  rarely  found.  The  indication,  then,  is  against  any 
extensive  development  of  estuaries  in  South  Carolina  during  Pleisto- 
cene times. 

Concerning  Geographical  Range. — The  eastward  and  westward 
migration  of  species  along  shore  is  in  general  more  easily  done  than 
is  the  migration  northward  and  southward.  In  the  former  case, 
the  temperature,  which  is  the  most  potent  factor  by  far  in  influen- 
cing faunal  distribution,  remains  practically  constant,  except  for 
changes  due  to  currents  in  the  sea  and  to  fresh-water  streams  from 
the  land ;  while,  in  the  latter  case,  the  northward  and  southward  ex- 
tent of  shore  line,  temperature  continually  changes  with  latitude, 
and  also  the  currents  and  rivers  play  an  important  role  in  modifying 
temperature.  It  is  not  so  difficult  for  a  northern  shallow-bottom 
species  that  is  not  littoral  to  migrate  southward  to  a  considerable 
distance,  for  it  can  always  seek  cooler  waters  by  sinking  into  deeper 
depths  as  the  southward  migration  is  continued.  But  it  is  almost  im- 
possible for  a  southern  shallow-bottom  species  to  migrate  very  far 
northward,  because  it  cannot  find  water  of  accustomed  temperature 
by  rising  to  more  shallow  depths,  being  already  in  shallow  depths. 
The  force  of  these  remarks  is  plainly  evident  when  it  is  recalled  that 
the  Pleistocene  forms  were  essentially  shallow-water  forms.  They 
were,  therefore,  as  much  limited  in  their  north  and  south  range  then 
by  reason  of  depth  conditions  as  they  are  today.  Furthermore,  such 
species  as  live  between  tides  and  such  as  are  strictly  shore  forms, 
getting  their  food  under  such  conditions,  are  very  much  restricted  in 
north  and  south  range,  for  in  this  case  the  privilege  of  seeking  cooler 
depths  as  it  moves  southward  is  denied  the  more  northern  form. 

Also,  there  is  more  likelihood  of  change  in  bottom  conditions  close 
in  shore  than  farther  out  at  deeper  depths;  or,  putting  it  the  other 
way,  conditions  of  bottom  are  more  constant  at  some  little  distance 
out  than  near  shore  line,  where  every  little  inlet  has  its  influences. 
These  things  combined  point  to  the  fact  that  the  Pleistocene  species, 
no  more  free  to  migrate  than  their  living  representatives  today,  can 
be  taken  as  a  safe  means  for  interpreting  what  must  have  been  the 
temperature  in  the  Pleistocene  Period  in  the  particular  latitudes  in 
which  they  are  found  fossil. 

Before  turning  again  to  the  tables,  there  is  another  factor  affect- 
ing distribution  of  marine  fauna  that  must  be  spoken  of,  and  that  is 
the  influence  of  currents.  In  this  particular  case,  the  influence  of  the 
warm  Gulf  Stream  and  of  the  cold  Arctic  Current  has  to  be  consid- 
ered. In  the  neighborhood  of  Cape  Hatteras,  according  to  Ball,  close 


62 

in  shore,  owing  to  the  cooling  effect  of  the  Arctic  Current,  there  are 
many  forms  that  belong  more  strictly  farther  north ;  while  off  shore, 
maybe  at  no  great  distance,  there  are  southern  forms  brought  north- 
ward beyond  their  limit  by  the  warm  waters  of  the  Gulf  Stream.  In 
this  way  are  brought  together,  in  closely  adjoining  regions,  two  dis- 
tinct facies — forms  which,  without  the  influence  of  currents,  would 
have  their  proper  habitat  hundreds  of  miles  apart.  Sharp  points  of 
land  jutting  out  into  the  sea  for  several  miles,  in  some  cases  many 
miles,  often  mark  the  limit  in  range  of  certain  forms,  especially  those 
that  love  the  simple  life,  preferring  a  quiet,  shallow-water  habitat; 
for,  in  attempting  to  round  such  a  point,  the  form  would  be  carried 
into  depths  it  is  unaccustomed  to,  or  into  bottom  or  shore  condi- 
tions different  from  those  hitherto  surrounding  it,  or  else  out  to  where 
waves  and  currents  are  more  vigorous  than  please  its  fancy.  Cape 
Cod,  Cape  Hatteras  and  Cape  Fear  are  just  such  points  along  the 
Atlantic  coast  that  mark  the  limit  of  range  for  a  goodly  number  of 
species.  Cape  Hatteras,  in  addition,  is  the  point  where  the  Gulf 
Stream  is  deflected  off  shore  as  it  flows  northward,  and  is  also  the 
point  where  the  Arctic  Current,  in  its  southward  movement,  ceases  to 
be  a  surface  current  and  sinks  beneath  the  Gulf  Stream.  For  the  rea- 
son that  Cape  Hatteras  marks  the  limit  of  so  many  forms  in  their 
migration,  it  has  been  taken  as  the  dividing  point  between  northern 
and  southern  forms.  Those  forms  whose  northern  limit  of  geo- 
graphical range  is  at  Cape  Hatteras,  may  be  regarded  as  southern, 
while  those  whose  corresponding  southern  limit  is  at  Cape  Hatteras 
may  be  regarded  as  northern  forms.  There  can  hardly  be  any  ob- 
jection made  to  taking  Hatteras  as  this  dividing  point;  for  here  it  is, 
let  it  be  remembered,  that  the  line  of  separation  between  the  warm 
along-shore  current  and  the  cold  along-shore  current  exists. 

With  these  remarks  as  prefatory  to  the  discussion  concerning  geo- 
graphical range,  a  close  study  of  the  tables  will  now  be  entered  upon 
with  the  purpose  of  seeing  what  must  have  been  the  geographical 
range  of  Pleistocene  forms.  Of  the  160  species  whose  ranges  are 
known,  eighty-eight  have  their  extreme  northern  geographical  range 
either  at  Cape  Hatteras  or  some  point  south  thereof,  and  may  be 
classed  as  southern  forms.  This  in  itself,  according  to  Fisher,  would 
be  sufficient  to  stamp  the  Pleistocene  forms  of  South  Carolina  as 
constituting  a  southern  facies,  his  law  being  that  if  more  than  50  per 
cent,  of  any  aggregation  of  marine  fauna  belong  to  any  one  facies, 
the  whole  aggregation  may,  in  general  terms,  be  placed  under  that 
facies.  Here  the  percentage  of  strictly  southern  forms  is  fifty-five. 


63 

But  this  is  no  more  than  was  to  be  expected.  Unless  there  had  been 
very  unusual  conditions  of  climate  during  the  Pleistocene  deposition, 
a  region  in  the  latitude  of  South  Carolina  could  hardly  be  expected 
to  have  anything  else  than  a  southern  facies  of  marine  fauna.  On 
the  other  hand,  it  is  somewhat  astonishing  to  find  that,  out  of  the  160 
species,  only  one  has  its  southern  limit  at  Hatteras  or  at  some  point 
north  thereof.  This  is  Aligena  elevata,  and  has  its  northern  limit  at 
Maine,  and  southern  at  Hatteras,  most  abundant  in  the  region  just 
south  of  Cape  Cod  on  to  New  Jersey.  Its  depth  range  is-  2-63  fathoms 
so  far  as  is  known.  The  probability  is  that  it  will  be  found  farther 
south  and  in  deeper  water  in  some  of  the  dredging  that  is  being 
done.  As  said  at  the  outset,  it  is  easier  for  a  cold-water  form  to 
move  into  warmer  regions  than  for  the  opposite  to  take  place.  This 
supposition  carries  more  credence  when  it  is  noticed  that  its  northern 
range  is  only  so  far  north  as  Maine,  and  its  deepest  depth  range  only 
sixty-three  fathoms.  Furthermore,  its  extreme  rarity  as  a  Pleisto- 
cene fossil  in  South  Carolina,  only  one  valve  being  found  from  several 
bushels  of  the  material  collected,  would  lead  one  not  to  attach  too 
much  importance  to  its  being  found  in  the  Pleistocene  so  far  south. 
There  is  a  pelagic  form  described  by  Holmes  under  the  name  Cauo- 
linia  Tuomeyii,  which  has  been  questionably  included  in  these  tables 
as  Cavolinia  gibbosa,  whose  range  limits  are  43°  N.  to  41°  N.  This 
form  cannot  enter  into  the  discussion ;  so  likewise  several  other  ques- 
tionable forms.  Turning  again  to  the  tables,  it  is  seen  that  there  are 
several  species  that  may  possibly  be  regarded  as  northern  forms, 
though  they  do  range  farther  south  than  to  Cape  Hatteras.  These 
are :  Venus  mercenaries  var.  no  tat  a,  Cape  Cod  to  Georgia ;  Petricola 
dactylus,  Maine  to  South  Carolina;  Macoma  balthica,  Arctic  Sea  to 
Georgia;  Mya  arenwia,  Nova  Scotia  to  South  Carolina;  Barnea 
truncata,  Massachusetts  to  South  Carolina;  Solen  viridis,  Rhode 
Island  to  Georgia;  Scala  multistriata,  Cape  Cod  to  South  Carolina; 
Turbonilla  nivea,  Maine  to  South  Carolina ;  Polynices  heros,  Gulf  of 
St.  Lawrence  to  Georgia  (on  authority  of  Verrill)  ;  Chiton  apicula- 
tus,  Massachusetts  to  South  Carolina.  But  every  one  of  these  is 
seen  to  reach  as  far  south  as  South  Carolina,  some  beyond.  If  they 
do  that  today,  there  is  no  reason  why  they  should  have  required  a 
different  climate  in  Pleistocene  times  to  reach  the  latitude  of  South 
Carolina.  Furthermore,  the  tables  show  that  almost  all  these  forms 
are  shallow-water  forms,  as  already  discussed,  and  could  have  mi- 
grated southward  more  easily  under  a  cooler  climate  than  under  a 
warmer  one.  If  the  climate  had  been  much  cooler  in  Pleistocene 


64 

times  than  today,  these  species  would  probably  have  pushed  their 
way  farther  southward  and  be  found  in  the  Pleistocene  deposits  of 
Florida.  A  search  into  the  Florida  Pleistocene  fossil  list  fails  to 
show  a  single  one  of  them  there.  So  the  supposition  that  the  Pleis- 
tocene climate  for  South  Carolina  was  cooler  than  that  today  loses 
this  evidence.  To  offset  these  seemingly  northern  forms,  we  find  a 
few  species  with  northern  limit  on  the  South  Carolina  shore  and 
ranging  to  the  southward,  namely :  Cyrene  caroliniana,  South  Caro- 
lina to  Cuba;  Mytilus  exustis,  Charleston  to  Brazil;  Xylotria  palmi- 
lata}  South  Carolina;  Pyramidella  crenulata,  South  Carolina  to  St. 
Thomas ;  Cochliolepis  nautiliformis,  South  Carolina  to  Florida  Keys. 
These  are  shallow-water  forms  even  in  their  most  southern  range, 
and  could  not  migrate  far  northward,  according  to  the  principle  pro- 
posed at  the  beginning  of  the  discussion  of  depth.  Their  northern 
range  would  be  more  limited  under  colder  climate.  Of  the  ten 
forms  named  as  possible  northern  forms,  eight  are  rare  in  their  oc- 
currence in  the  South  Carolina  Pleistocene,  and  the  other  two  are  by 
no  means  abundant.  Of  the  five  forms  ranging  from  South  Carolina 
southward,  four  are  rare  in  the  Pleistocene,  but  the  fifth,  Pyramidella 
crenulata,  is  abundant.  This  may  be  taken  as  a  slight  indication  that 
these  warm-water  species  were  more  at  home  in  the  region  than  were 
the  species  from  cooler  waters. 

One  more  comparison,  and  then  the  general  conclusions  can  be 
drawn.  It  is  seen  that  three  forms  have  their  southern  limit  a  little 
to  the  north  of  South  Carolina,  but  still  south  of  Cape  Hatteras. 
These  are  Yoldia  limatula,  with  a  range  from  Norway  to  North  Car- 
olina; Modiolus  modiolus,  from  the  Arctic  Sea  to  North  Carolina, 
and  Mytilus  edulis  from  the  Arctic  Sea  to  Fort  Macon,  North  Caro- 
lina. They  are  very  rare  in  their  occurrence  in  the  beds  under  discus- 
sion. It  is  not  unreasonable  to  suppose  that,  if  these  species  had 
vitality  enough  to  survive  after  rounding  the  Cape,  they  may  have 
pushed  their  way  farther  south  still.  It  may  be  said  of  them,  as  it  was 
said  of  Aligena  elevata,  that  it  can  be  expected  that  dredgings  will 
reveal  them  farther  south  than  they  have  yet  been  found.  To  compare 
with  these,  there  are  six  or  seven  species  that  have  their  northern  limit 
to  the  south  of  South  Carolina.  These  one  may,  in  this  connection 
call  extreme  southern  forms.  One  of  them,  Sportella  constricta,  is 
questionably  included  in  the  tables,  and  will  not  be  considered,  as  no 
correct  conclusion  could  be  drawn  from  questionable  data.  The 
other  six  are:  Diplodanta  soror,  Tortugas  to  Jamaica;  Cyclinella 
tennis,  Cedar  Keys,  Florida,  to  Brazil ;  Cardita  floridana,  Tampa  to 


65 

Key  West ;  Rangia  cuneata,  Gulf  of  Mexico  to  West  Florida ;  Petri- 
cola  typica,  Cape  of  Florida  to  the  Antilles ;  Tritonidia  cancellaria, 
Jupiter  Inlet,  Florida,  to  the  Isthmus  of  Darien.  These  deserve 
especial  notice.  Diplodanta  soror  is  common  in  its  occurrence  in  the 
Pleistocene  of  the  State;  and  Rangia  cuneata,  as  has  already  been 
pointed  out,  is  very  abundant  indeed  in  the  bed  underlying  Charles- 
ton. This  last-named  species,  as  has  already  been  noticed,  is  found 
in  abundance  in  Maryland  up  the  Potomac  from  Cornfield  Harbor. 
Its  occurrence  so  abundantly  so  far  north  as  Maryland  is  very  re- 
markable, and  must  mean  that,  at  some  time  during  the  Pleistocene 
Period,  there  was  greater  warmth  in  that  particular  region  than  to- 
day, or  else  that  the  brackish  water  has  failed  in  some  of  the  neces- 
sary conditions  to  sustain  Rangia  cuneata.  The  occurrence  of  these 
extreme  southern  forms,  together  with  the  abundance  of  the  two 
just  mentioned  and  also  the  Tritonidia  cancellaria  (on  Stono  River), 
almost  compel  the  conclusion  that  the  Pleistocene  fades  of  South 
Carolina,  if  different  from  that  of  the  coast  today  in  the  same  region, 
was  more  southern. 

General  Conclusions  from  the  Study  of  the  Tables. — According  to 
Dall,  the  Pleistocene  of  Florida  shows  a  change  for  the  cooler  from 
the  warm  temperature  of  the  Pliocene.  He  says  further:  "The 
Pleistocene  [of  Florida],  though  far  from  glacial  as  at  the  north, 
was  a  period  of  diminished  sea  temperatures  and  moderate  elevation 
without  perceptible  tilting.  The  present  epoch  has  witnessed  a 
slight  increase  of  sea  temperatures  and  a  very  slight,  probably  con- 
tinuous, elevation  amounting  in  all  to  only  a  few  feet."  McGee  may 
be  quoted  in  this  connection:  "W.  B.  Rogers,  Sanderson  Smith, 
Cook,  Cope,  Kerr,  Fontaine,  Lewis,  Chester  and  others  believe  it  [the 
Columbia  or  Pleistocene  of  the  whole  coast]  was  deposited  during 
a  period  of  low  temperature."  McGee's  view  also  was  in  accord  with 
this  belief.  He  says  that  Desor,  whose  view  will  be  given  later,  drew 
his  conclusions  from  too  limited  data.  Conrad,  in  speaking  of  the 
Cornfield  Harbor  species,  says :  "Were  it  not  for  the  presence  of 
Gnathodon  cuneatus  [Rangia  cuneata],  Mytilus  hamatus  and 
Area  ponder  osa,  the  group  would  not  vary  from  that  now  inhab- 
iting the  coast  as  far  north  as  Massachusetts;  but  the  occurrence 
of  these  three  bivalves  indicates  that  a  climate  equivalent  to 
that  of  Florida  prevailed  when  the  shells  of  this  locality  were 
living  in  the  sea."  But  this  view  loses  some  of  its  force,  since 
two  of  the  forms  he  here  mentions  are  known  to  live  at  present 
as  far  north  as  Long  Island  Sound  and  Cape  Cod,  namely: 

S-P.  D. 


66 

Mytilus  hamatus  and  Area  ponderosa.  The  other  one  of  the 
three,  Rangia  cuneata,  is  the  only  form  present  that  would  indi- 
cate a  higher  temperature  than  at  present  prevails;  but  the 
abundance  of  this,  as  has  already  been  pointed  out,  gives  Con- 
rad's statement  considerable  force,  though  it  is  hardly  probable  that 
the  climate  of  Maryland  in  Pleistocene  times  was  anything  near  so 
warm  as  is  that  of  Florida  today.  Another  fact  that  adds  some 
weight  to  the  view  here  expressed  in  regard  to  the  Cornfield  Harbor 
deposit  is  that,  in  addition  to  Rangia  cuneata,  there  are  two  other 
forms  whose  northern  range  limit  falls  short  of  reaching  the  Corn- 
field Harbor  latitude,  stopping  at  or  below  Cape  Hatteras.  "In  1852 
Desor  reviewed  the  paleontology  of  the  formation  [Pleistocene]  as 
developed  from  South  Carolina  to  Sankoty  Head  and  Point  Shirley, 
noted  that  the  fossils  are  'nearly  all  referable  to  living  species,'  and 
that  the  deposit  occupies  only  a  very  narrow  zone,  and  inferred  not 
only  that  it  is  marine  but  that  the  climate  was  warmer  than  now 
when  it  was  deposited"  (McGee).  "Verrill  more  recently  enumer- 
ated about  sixty  species  from  the  deposits  of  Sankoty  Head,  of 
which  those  from  the  lower  strata  indicate  warmer  and  those  from 
the  upper  strata  colder  climate  than  the  present"  (McGee).  Enough 
views  have  been  quoted  to  show  that  there  are  various  and  con- 
flicting opinions  as  to  the  climate  prevailing  in  Pleistocene  times. 
Almost  all  the  more  recent  views  embody  the  general  assertion  that 
the  Pleistocene  was  a  period  of  much  lower  temperature  than  the 
Pliocene  and  slightly  lower  than  the  present.  However  unwilling 
an  inexperienced  worker  may  be  for  the  view  he  reaches  to  be  op- 
posed to  that  held  by  experienced  workers  in  any  particular  field, 
the  facts  gained  from  the  study  of  the  tables  just  completed  compel 
the  writer  to  say  that  the  weight  of  evidence  seems  to  justify  the 
opinion  that,  if  the  Pleistocene  sea  temperature  differed  at  all  from 
that  of  the  present,  it  was  slightly  higher  rather  than  slightly  lower 
than  that  of  the  present.  This  would  seem  true  in  South  Carolina, 
whatever  it  may  have  been  elsewhere.  Now,  as  has  already  been  inti- 
mated, it  may  be  that  the  results  of  more  thorough  study  of  the 
fauna  of  the  Atlantic  coast  and  more  abundant  dredging  may 
change  the  conclusions  here  reached,  but  until  such  data  have  been 
acquired — if  they  ever  are — the  conclusions  above  stated  would  seem 
to  be  the  ones  best  warranted  by  the  data  at  present  available. 


67 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 


This  is  not  intended  to  be  an  exhaustive  bibliography,  but  to  in- 
clude only  the  main  articles  bearing  on  the  subject. 

ALLEN,  J.  H. 

Some  Facts  Respecting  the  Geology  of  Tampa  Bay,  Florida 
(Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  2d  ser.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  38-42,  1846). 

BAILEY,  J.  W. 

Microscopical  Examination  of  Sounds  Made  by  the  United 
States  Coast  Survey  (Smithsonian  Contributions,  Vol.  II, 
3d  Art.,  1851. 

BARTRAM,  WILLIAM. 

Travels  through  North  and  South  Carolina,  Georgia,  etc., 
Containing  an  Account  of  the  Soil,  etc.  (Philadelphia, 
1791). 

CATESBY,  M. 

Natural  History  of  Carolina,  Florida,  and  the  Bahama  Islands, 
1731.  (Not  seen.) 

CHARLESTON. 

Report  of  the  Scientific  Committee  of  the  City  on  Artesian 
Wells  (Year  Book,  Charleston,  1882). 

CLARK,  W.  B. 

The  Eocene  Deposits  of  the  Middle  Atlantic   Coast    (U.   S. 

Geol.  Surv.,  Bull.  No.  141,  1896). 
Climatology  and  Physical  Features  of  Maryland  (Md.  Weath. 

Service,  1st  Bien.  Rep.  for  1892-93,  pp.  1-146,  1894). 
Outline  of  the  Present  Knowledge  of  the  Physical  Features  of 

Maryland  (Md.  Geol.  Surv.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  141-228,  1897). 

CONRAD,  T.  A. 

Fossil  Shells  of  the  Tertiary  Formations  of  America  (Phila- 
delphia, 1832-35 ;  republished  by  G.  D.  Harris,  Washing- 
ton, 1893). 

Observations  on  the  Tertiary  and  More  Recent  Formations  of 
a  Portion  of  the  Southern  States  (Phila.  Acad.  Sci.,  Jour., 
Vol.  VII,  pp.  116-129,  1834). 

Observations  on  the  Tertiary  Strata  of  the  Atlantic  Coast 
(Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  Vol.  XXVIII,  pp.  104-111;  280-282, 

1835). 

Observations  on  a  Portion  of  the  Atlantic  Tertiary  Region 
(Geol.  Soc.  Penn.,  Trans.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  335-341,  1835). 


68 

Fossils  of  the  Medial  Tertiary  of  the  United  States  (Phila- 
delphia, 1848;  republished  with  an  Introduction  by  W.  H. 
Dall,  Wagner  Free  Inst.  ScL,  Philadelphia,  1893). 

Observations  on  the  Geology  of  a  Part  of  East  Florida,  with 
a  Catalogue  of  Recent  Shells  of  the  Coast  (Am.  Jour.  Sci., 
2d  ser.,  Vol.  II,  pp.  36-48,  1846). 

Observations  on  the  Eocene  Lignite  Formations  of  the  United 
States  (Phila.  Acad.  Sci.,  Proc.,  Vol.  XVII,  pp.  70-73, 
1865 ;  Am-  Jour.  Sci.,  2d.  ser.,  Vol.  XL,  pp.  265-268,  1865) . 

Remarks  on  the  Tertiary  Formations  of  the  Atlantic  Coast 
(Geol.  Surv.  North  Car.,  Report  of  W.  C.  Kerr,  pp.  24-25, 
Raleigh,  1875). 

COUPER,  J.  H. 

On  the  Geology  of  a  Part  of  the  Seacoast  of  Georgia,  with  a 
Description  of  the  Fossil  Remains  of  the  Megatherium,  etc. 
(Memoir  on  the  Megatherium  and  other  Extinct  Quad- 
rupeds on  the  Coast  of  Georgia,  by  W.  G.  Hogsdon,  pp. 
31-47,  New  York,  1846). 

DALL,  W.  H. 

Notes  on  the  Geology  of  Florida    (Am.  Jour.   Sci.,  3d  ser., 

Vol.  XXXIV,  pp.  161-170,. 1887). 
Notes  on  the  Miocene  and  Pliocene  of  Gay  Head  and  Martha's 

Vineyard,   Massachusetts,  and  on  the  "Land   Phosphate" 

of  the  Ashley  River  District,  South  Carolina   (Am.  Jour. 

Sci.,  3d  ser.,  Vol.  XLVIII,  pp.  296-301,  1894). 
and  HARRIS,  G.  D. 
Correlation  Papers,  Neocene  (U.  S.  Geol.  Surv.,  Bull.  No.  84, 

1892). 
Transactions  of  the  Wagner  Free  Institute  of  Sciences  (Parts 

1-6  of  Vol.  Ill,  Philadelphia,  1890-1903). 

DANA,  JAMES  D. 

Quaternary  Geology  (Manual  of  Geology,  Fourth  Edition, 
pp.  981-989). 

DARTON,  N.  H. 

Outline  of  the  Cenozoic  History  of  a  Portion  of  the  Middle 

Atlantic  Slope  (Jour.  Geol.,  Vol.  II,  pp.  568-587,  1894). 
Artesian  Well  Prospects  in  Eastern  Virginia,  Maryland,  and 

Delaware    (Am.   Inst.   Mg.   Engrs.,   Trans.,   Vol.   XXIV, 

PP-  372-379'  1895). 
Artesian  Well  Prospects  in  the  Atlantic  Coastal  Plain  Region 

(U.  S.  Geol.  Surv.,  Bull.  No.  138,  1896). 
Notes  on  the  Relations  of  the  Lower  Members  of  the  Coastal 

Plain   Series  in  South  Carolina    (Geol.   Soc.  Am.,  Bull., 

Vol.  VII,  pp.  512-518,  1896). 


69 

DAVIS,  W.  M. 

The  Geological  Dates  of  the  Origin  of  Certain  Topographical 
Forms  on  the  Atlantic  Slope  of  the  United  States  (Geol. 
Soc.  Am.,  Bull.,  Vol.  II,  pp.  541-586,  1891). 

DEPOURTAILES,  L.  F. 

Constitution  of  the  Bottom  of  the  Ocean  off  Cape  Hatteras 
(Boston  Soc.  Nat.  Hist.,  Proc.,  Vol.  XIV,  pp.  58-59,  1872; 
Am.  Nat.,  Vol.  V,  pp.  124,  125,  1871). 

DESOR,  E. 

Post-Pliocene  of  the  Southern  States  and  its  Relation  to  the 
Laurentian  of  the  North  and  the  Deposits  of  the  Valley  of 
the  Mississippi  (Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  2d  ser.,  Vol.  XIV, 
PP- 49-59.  1852). 

DICKSON,  JOHN. 

Notice  of  the  Mineralogy  and  Geology  of  Parts  of  North  and 
South  Carolina  (Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  1-4,  1821). 

EMMONS,  EBENEZER. 

Report  on  the  Geological  Survey  of  North  Carolina  (Raleigh, 

1852). 

FINCH,  JOHN. 

Geological  Essay  on  the  Tertiary  Formations  in  America  (Am. 
Jour.  Sci.,  Vol.  VII,  pp.  31-43*  1824). 

FOSTER,  J.  W. 

On  the  Geological  Position  of  the  Deposits  in  which  Occur  the 
Remains  of  the  Fossil  Elephant  of  North  America  (Am. 
Assoc.  Adv.  Sci.,  Proc.,  Vol.  X,  Part  2,  pp.  148-169,  1857). 

GLENN,  L.  C. 

The  Hatteras  Axis  in  Triassic  and  in  Miocene  Time    (Am. 

Geol.,  Vol.  XXIII,  pp.  375-379,  1899)- 
Underground   Waters   of  the   United   States — South   Carolina 

(Water  Supply  and  Irrigation  Paper  No.  114,  pp.  140-152, 

U.  S.  G.  S.,  1905). 

HAMMOND,  HARRY. 

South  Carolina.  Resources,  etc.,  725  pages  (published  by  State 
Board  of  Agriculture,  Charleston,  1883). 

Outline  of  the  Physical  and  Agricultural  Features  of  the  State 
of  South  Carolina  (Tenth  Census  of  the  United  States, 
Vol.  VI,  Part  2,  pp.  463-503,  Washington,  1884). 


70 

HEILPRIN,  A. 

On  the  Relative  Ages  and  Classifications  of  the  Post-Eocene 

Tertiary  Deposits  of  the  Atlantic  Slope  (Phila.  Acad.  Sci., 

Proc.,  Vol.  XXXIV,  pp.  150186,  1883;  Am.  Jour.  Sci., 

3d  sen,  Vol.  XXIV,  pp.  228,  229,  1882). 
Tertiary  Geology  of  the  Eastern  and  Southern  United  States 

(Phila.  Acad.  Sci.,  Jour.,  Vol.  IX,  Part  I,  pp.   115-154, 

1884). 
Contributions  to  the  Tertiary  Geology  and  Paleontology  of  the 

United  States  (Philadelphia,  1884). 

HODGE,  J.  T. 

Observations  on  the  Secondary  and  Tertiary  Formations  of  the 
Southern  Atlantic  States  (Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  Vol.  XLI, 
pp.  182,  183 ;  332-344,  1841 ;  Assoc.  Am.  Geol.,  Trans., 
PP-  34,  35;  94-i  1 1,  1843). 

HOLLICK,  ARTHUR. 

Geological  Notes  on  Long  Island  and  Nantucket  (N.  Y.  Acad. 
Sci.,  Trans.,  Vol.  XV,  pp.  3-10,  1896). 

HOLMES,  F.  S. 

Notes  on  the  Geology  of  Charleston,  South  Carolina  (Am.  Jour. 

Sci.,  2d  ser.,  Vol  VII,  pp.  178-201,  1849). 
Observations  on  the  Geology  of  Ashley  River,  South  Carolina 

(Am.  Assoc.  Adv.  Sci.,  Proc.,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  201-204,  1850). 
and  TOUMEY,  M. 

Pliocene  Fossils  of  South  Carolina  (Charleston,  1857). 
Remains  of  Domestic  Animals  Among  the  Post-Pliocene  Fossils 

in  South  Carolina.  Pamphlet,  16  pages  (Charleston,  1858). 
Post-Pliocene  Fossils  of  South  Carolina  (Charleston,  1860). 
Phosphate  Rocks  of  South  Carolina,  and  the  "Great  Carolina 

Marl  Bed,"  87  pages  and  4  plates  (Charleston,  1870). 

HOLMES,  J.  A. 

Taxodium  in  North  Carolina  Quaternary  (Elisha  Mitchell  Sci. 

Soc.,  Jour.,  pp.  92,  93,  1884-85). 
Mineralogical,  Geological  and  Agricultural  Surveys  of  South 

Carolina    (Elisha   Mitchell    Sci.    Soc.,   Jour.,   pp.   89-117, 

1890). 
Geology  of  the  Sandhill  Country  of  the  Carolinas  (Geol.  Soc. 

Am.,  Bull.,  Vol.  V,  pp.  33,  34,  1894). 

KERR,  W.  C. 

Report  of  the  Geological  Survey  of  North  Carolina:  Physical 
Geography,  Geology,  etc.,  325  pages  (Raleigh,  1875). 

LEA,  ISAAC. 

Contribution    to    Geology,    227    pages    (Philadelphia,    1833)  ; 
Abstract  (Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  3d  ser.,  Vol.  XXV,  pp.  413-23,  1833). 


LEIDY,  JOSEPH. 

Remarks  on  the  Fossils  from  the  Ashley  River  Beds   (Phila. 
Acad.  Sci.,  Proc.,  Vol.  XXVIII,  pp.  80,  81 ;  86,  87;  114, 
115,  1876). 
Abstract   (Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  3d  sen,  Vol.  XIII,  pp.  222,  223, 

is/6). 

Descriptions  of  Vertebrate  Remains,  Chiefly  from  the  Phos- 
phate Beds  of  South  Carolina  (Phila.  Acad.  Sci.,  Jour., 
2d  sen,  Vol.  VIII,  pp.  209-261,  1881), 

LlEBER,  O.  M. 

Report  on  the  Survey  of  South  Carolina  (Columbia,  1856). 

Notes  on  Certain  Ancient  and  Recent  Changes  Along  the  Coast 
of  South  Carolina  (Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  2d  sen,  Vol.  XXVIII, 
PP-  354-359,  1859). 

Fourth  Annual  Report  on  the  Survey  of  South  Carolina  (Co- 
lumbia, 1860). 

LYELL,  SIR  CHARLES. 

Travels  in  North  America,  1841-42  (London,  1845;  two  vol- 
umes). 

Observations  on  the  White  Limestone  and  Other  Eocene  Forma- 
tions of  Virginia,  South  Carolina,  and  Georgia  (Geol. 
Soc.,  Quart.  Jour.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  429-442,  1845). 

On  the  Miocene  Tertiary  Strata  of  Maryland,  Virginia,  and 
North  and  South  Carolina  (Geol.  Soc.,  Quart.  Jour.,  Vol. 
I,  pp.  413-429,  1845). 

On  the  Newer  Deposits  of  the  Southern  States  of  North 
America  (Geol.  Soc.,  Quart.  Jour.,  Vol.  II,  pp.  405-410, 
1846). 

MACLURE,  WILLIAM. 

Geology  of  the  United  States  (Am.  Phil.  Soc.,  Trans.,  Vol.  VI, 
pp.  411-428,  1818). 

:McCALLiE,  S.  W. 

Artesian  Well  System  of  Georgia  (Geol.  Surv.  of  Georgia,  Bull. 

No.  7,  Atlanta,  1898). 
Underground  Waters  of  the  United  States — Georgia   (U.  S. 

G.  S.,  Water  Supply  and  Irrigation  Paper  No.  114,  pp. 

153-158,  1905)- 

McGEE,  J.  W. 

The  Geology  of  the  Head  of  Chesapeake  Bay   (U.  S.  Geol. 

Surv.,  7th  Report,  pp.  537-646,  Washington,  1888). 
Three  Formations  of  the  Middle  Atlantic  Slope  (Am.  Jour.  Sci., 

3d   sen,   Vol.   XXXV,   pp.    120-143;   328-330;    367-388; 

448-466,  1888). 
The  Southern  Extension  of  the  Appomattox  Formation  (Am. 

Jour.  Sci.,  3d  ser.,  Vol.  XL,  pp.  15-41,  1890). 


72 

Neocene  and  Pleistocene  Continent  Movements  (Am.  Geol.,  Vol. 

VIII,  pp.  234,235,  1891). 
The  Lafayette  Formation  (U.  S.  Geol.  Surv.,  I2th  Report,  Part 

i»  PP- 353-521,  1893). 
Classifications  of  Pleistocene  Deposits  (Int.  Con.  Geol.,  Compte 

Rendu,  5th  Session,  pp.  160-166,  1893). 

MILLS,  ROBERT. 

Geology  and  Mineralogy  of  South  Carolina  (Statistics  of  South 
Carolina,  pp.  17-60,  Charleston,  1826). 

MITCHELL,  ELISHA. 

On  the  Character  and  Origin  of  the  Low  Country  of  North 
Carolina  (Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  Vol.  XIII,  pp.  336-348,  1828). 

MITCHELL,  SAM.  L. 

Observations  on  the  Geology  of  North  America,  Illustrated  by 
the  Descriptions  of  Various  Organic  Remains  Found  in 
that  Part  of  the  World  (Cuvier's  Essay  on  the  Theory  of 
the  Earth,  pp.  319-424,  New  York,  1818). 

PACKARD,  A.  S.,  JR. 

Geology  of  the  Phosphate  Beds  of  South  Carolina  (Essex  Inst., 
Bull.,  Vol.  Ill,  55-58,  1872;  Am.  Nat.,  Vol.  VI,  pp. 

55-58). 

Results  of  Observations  on  the  Drift  Phenomena  of  Labrador 

and  the  Atlantic  Coast  Southward    (Am.  Jour.   Sci.,  2d 

ser.,  Vol.  XLI,  pp.  30-32,  1866). 
Observations  on  the  Glacial  Phenomena  of  Labrador  and  Maine, 

etc.    (Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  2d  ser.,  Vol.  XLIV,  pp.   117,  118, 

1867). 

PENROSE,  R.  A.  F.,  JR. 

Nature  and  Origin  of  Phosphate  of  Lime  (U.  S.  Geol.  Surv., 
Bull.,  Vol.  VII,  pp.  475-617,  1872). 

PORTER,  TIMOTHY  D. 

Cursory  Notice  of  Some  Parts  of  North  and  South  Carolina 
(Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  227-230,  1821). 

PRATT,  N.  A. 

Ashley  River  Phosphates,  42  pages  (Philadelphia,  1868). 

ROGERS,  H.  D. 

On  American  Geology  and  Present  Conditions  of  Geological 
Research  in  the  United  States  (Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  Vol. 
XLVII,  pp.  137-160;  247-278,  1844). 


73 

RUFFIN,  EDMUND. 

Report  of  the  Commencement  and  Progress  of  the  Agricultural 
Survey  of  South  Carolina  for  1843  (Columbia,  1843). 

SALISBURY,  R.  D. 

A  Preliminary  Paper  on  Drift  or  Pleistocene  Formations  in 
New   Jersey    (N.   J.    Geol.    Surv.,   Report   for    1891,   pp. 
35-108,  1892). 
Surface  Geology  (N.  J.  Geol.  Surv.,  Rep.  for  1892,  pp.  37-166, 

1893). 

Surface  Geology  (N.  J.  Geol.  Surv.,  Rep.  for  1895,  pp.  3-16, 

1896). 

Surface  Formations  of  Southern  New  Jersey  (Geol.  Soc.  Am., 

Bull.,  Vol.  VI,  pp.  483-488,  1895). 
The  Physical  Geography  of  New  Jersey   (N.  J.  Geol.  Surv., 

Final  Report,  Vol.  IV,  1895). 
Surface  Geology  (N.  J.  Geol.  Surv.,  Rep.  for  1897,  pp.  1-22, 

1898). 
Surface  Geology  (N.  J.  Geol.  Surv.,  Rep.  for  1898,  pp.  1-41, 

1899). 

SHALER,  N.  S. 

On  the  Phosphate  Beds  of  South  Carolina  (U.  S.  Coast  Surv., 

Rep.  for  1870,  pp.   182-189,  Washington,   1870.     Boston 

Soc.  Nat.  Hist.,  Proc.,  Vol.  XIII,  pp.  222-236,  1871). 
Pleistocene  Distortions  of  the  Atlantic  Seacoast  (Geol.  Soc.  Am., 

Bull.,  Vol.  V,  pp.  199-202,  1894). 
On  the  Causes  which  Have  Led  to  the  Production  of  Cape  Hat- 

teras    (Boston    Soc.    Nat.    Hist.,    Proc.,    Vol.    XIV,    pp. 

110-121,  1872). 

SHARPLES,  S.  P. 

On  Some  Rocks  and  Other  Dredgings  from  the  Gulf  Stream 
(Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  3d  ser.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  168-171). 

SHATTUCK,  G.  B. 

The    Pleistocene    Problem   of   the   Northern   Atlantic   Coastal 
Plain  (Am.  Geol.,  Vol.  XXVIII,  pp.  87-107,  1901). 

SHEPARD,  C.  U. 

Phosphate  Sand  in  South  Carolina  (Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  3d  ser., 

Vol.  II,  pp.  50-59,  1871). 
Notes   dn  the   Occurrence   and   Composition   of  the   Nodular 

Phosphates    (Am.  Jour.   Sci.,  2d  ser.,  Vol.   XLVII,   pp. 

354-357,  1869). 

SPENCER,  J.  W. 

Southern  Drift  (Exper.  Sta.  Georgia,  Bull.,  5  pages,  1890). 
Post-Pliocene    Continental    Subsidence    (in    America)    versus 
Glacial  Dams  (Geol.  Soc.  Am.,  Bull.  Vol.  II,  pp. 
1891). 


74 

STEPHENSON,  M.  F. 

Geology  and  Mineralogy  of  Georgia  (Atlanta,  1871). 

TUOMEY,  M. 

Report  on  the  Geological  and  Agricultural  Survey  of  South 

Carolina  (Columbia,  1844). 

Report  on  the  Geology  of  South  Carolina  (Columbia,  1848). 
Notice  of  the  Geology  of  the  Florida  Keys  and  of  the  Southern 
Coast    of    Florida    (Am.    Jour.    Sci.,    2d    ser.,    Vol.    II, 
PP-  390-394,  1851). 
and  HOLMES,  S.  F. 
Pliocene  Fossils  of  South  Carolina  (Charleston,  1857). 

VANUXEM,  LARDNER. 

Geological  Observations  on  the  Secondary,  Tertiary,  and  Allu- 
vial of  the  Atlantic  Coast  of  the  United  States  (Phila. 
Acad.  Sci.,  Jour.,  Vol.  VI,  pp.  59-71,  1828). 

WHITE,  GEORGE. 

Statistics  of  the  State  of  Georgia  (Savannah,  1849). 

WOODWARD,  J.  B. 

Glacial  Origin  of  Older  Pleistocene  in  Gay  Head  Cliffs  (Geol. 
Soc.  Am.,  Bull.,  Vol.  XI,  pp.  455-460,  1900). 


EARTH  SC.ENUS  L.BRA.U 


642-2997 


BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  »j«^W 


1 


FORM  NO.  DD8 


BERKELEY,  CA  94720 


6AYLORD   BROS. 

MAKERS 

SYRACUSE, -N.Y. 

PAT.  JAN.  21,  1908 


